JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

FACULTY OF LAW

NAME – SHANTANU AGNIHOTRI

COURSE – B.A. LLB (HONS.)

SEMESTER II

SUBJECT – SOCIOLOGY

THEME – Critical Examination of Akbar’s

Religious Policy

SUBMITTED TO: Dr. GULRUKH KHAN

TABLE OF CONTENT
1. Introduction
2. Factors responsible for his liberalism

3. Islamic Orthodoxy

4. Ibadat Khana
5. Towards the Hindu

6. MAHZAR

7. DIN-I-ILAHI
8. Sulh-i-kul

9. Art and Literature

10. Summary and Conclusion

11. Bibliography
Introduction
Akbar is seen as one of the greatest ruler of the Mughal dynasty in India and was celebrated for
his liberal ideas and religious policies based on mutual understanding. However, a close analysis
of his religious policies and ideology shows it clearly that it was not the case always. Akbar,
during former years of his reign was a staunch follower of Islam and was closely associated with
the ulama who dominated the court at that time. It’s only over the years, that we find certain
significant changes befell in the perception of the emperor towards the matters of religion in his
empire.

Of all the Muslim rulers in India, Akbar proved the most liberal exponent of universal tolerance
‘SulahKul’. Politically endowed with a rare shrewdity of mind, Akbar discerned early that a
mere tolerance of the Hindus by itself was not enough. At best, it could only secure him their
passive acceptance as in the case of Sher Shah, but deny him their trust and active cooperation
which were essential for the consolidation of the empire. Additionally, as he was deeply
interested in securing the welfare of his subjects, his policy was equally devoted to eradicating
not only the religious but the prevalent social evils too.

Akbar had been brought up in an atmosphere surcharged with conflicting religious influences.
His father was a Central Asian Sunni given to belief in superstitious mysticism. In his childhood
he came in contact with Sufism and from 1562, for eighteen long years, he made annual
pilgrimage to the shrine of Sheikh Muinuddin Chishti at Ajmer. His Rajput wives, his Hindu
officials like Todarmal, Birbal and Man Singh, scholars like Faizi and Abul Fazl and the Bhakti
movement of the sixteenth century helped in molding his religious views. He developed a
passionate love for philosophical discussions and spiritual quest, which led to the foundation of
the Ibadatkhana (Hall of Worship) at Fatehpur Skirl.
It is argued and widely debated that all of Akbar’s religious policies were in fact initiated to gain
popularity from the masses, both Hindu’s as well as Muslims (even though, technically speaking,
there were no “Hindu’s” at that time, but for the sake of simplicity, and to get a panoramic view
of the situation.
The exposition of Akbar’s religious policy was not the sudden outburst of an idea nor a
calculated political move. Its growth and development was spread over the years.

Before examining Akbar’s religious policies, one should also pay heed to the religious
challenges posed to the emperor during his reign. We find that that conflicts were both inter-
religious and intra-religious. One of the major intra-religious conflict was between the Shia and
Sunni sects. Mughal state clearly had close association with the Sunnis , but it followed a policy
of tolerance and unlike its contemporary Islamic states it had not made any public proclamation
of ist affliation to one particular sect. Meanwhile, a large number of Shia migration from the
Safavid state took place , which followed a very orthodox policy. Despite the lucrative salaries
of the Mughal court and open-policy of the state, the conflict between these two sects intensified.

In the initial years Akbar was also inclined towards the sect of Mahadawis. The followers of this
sect believed that the advent of a Mahdi or a messiah was forecasted and did not agree with the
fact that the Prophet Mohammad was the last prophet. In Akbar’s early years, this easily
identifiable class was not well inclined to Mughal rule and could be easily be accused of
disloyalty as well as of unorthodoxy. The Orthodoxy saw them as heretics, but the Mughal state
did not persecute them for a very long time. Thus, Akbar’s religious policies were implemented
in the background of such religious challenges posed to him, of which the most crucial one was
the changes in the relationship and the constant struggle between the Crown and the ulama.

Scholars have understood Akbar’s religious policies in diverse manners. Scholars like S. Rizvi
and Athar Ali see it as representing a much wider change in Akbar’s perspective on religion and
the development of his religious ideas. Others like I.A. Khan links the changes that were
introduced in the organisation of the Mughal government and religious policy tot he structure,
composition and changes under Akbar. Some other scholars like K.A. Nizami sees the change as
nothing more than a changing attitude towards the ulama. He also divides Akbar’s reign in the
context of his religious ideas into 3 phases.
Factors responsible for his liberalism

The Influence of His Heredity “endowed him with those qualities of head and heart that
prepared him to receive the impress of his environments and reflect it in the best possible way”.
The Timurids besides their lust for blood and passion for warfare, proved equally voracious
admirers of art and literature that rid them of the narrow religious orthodoxy. Babur and
Humayun, while acquiescing to the tenets of Islam, were never orthodox. Moreover, Akbar’s
mother besides being a daughter of the Shia house was herself as Persian scholar. Akbar,
therefore, born of a ‘Sunni Shia Wedlock’ early inculcated the necessity of tolerance, a quality
that was equally impressed upon his mind by Abdul Latif, his tutor and the Sufi saints who had
sought shelter at the Kabul Court. As a Sultan, his marriage with the Rajput princesses and his
close association with Hindus and the Rajput noblemen (like Todarmal, Birbal and Raja Man
Singh) and thinkers, further liberalised his thoughts and policies. Akbar’s religious tolerance was
also an outcome of political necessity. In order to consolidate the state, he conciliated the Rajputs
and attempted to abolish the glaring distinctions between the Hindus and Muslims by abolishing
the Pilgrimage tax and the Jeziya and encouraging the Hindus to growingly associate with the
administratio . Besides the temporal motives, Akbar’s inquisitive mind harboured an eager
craving to discern ‘the truth of life and the universe’. As in other parts of the world, the 16th
century was a period of religious and social revival in India. The ground had already been
prepared in the preceding two centuries by the various religious and social reformers like Guru
Nanak and Chaitanya who had reawakened in the country appreciation of the necessity of
tolerance and reform. They had prepared the way for the integration and higher synthesis of all
the dynamic and progressive forces. Akbar, “intelligent to an uncommon degree, with a mind
alert and inquisitive, was best fitted by birth, upbringing and association to feel most keenly
those hankering and that spiritual unrest which distinguished the century in which he lived. He
was not only the child of his century; he was its best replica”. Even as a youth, he was inclined
towards mysticism. This is corroborated by his foremost critic Badauni who writes that “he
would sit many a morning alone in prayer and melancholy, on a large flat stone of an old
building near the palace in a lonely spot with his head bent over his chest, and meditate on the
eternal mystery of life”. His association with the liberal, Sheikh Mubarak, and his two sons, Faizi
and AbulFazl, endowed him with a greater awareness of the hollowness of the ulemas’
interpretations and encouraged him to discern the truth for himself.

ISLAMIC ORTHODOXY
In the first phase (1556-1574), Akbar seems to be in agreement with the Islamic orthodoxy.
There is also a tentativeness in the manner in which he dealt with different groups. In the first 20
years of his reign, he made serious departures from the traditional Sunni system of government.
In 1562, the pilgrimage tax on Hindus was abolished. Abu Faz’l informs us about the
abolishment of jiziya in the year 1564, and also the abolishment in the practice of enslaving the
prisoners of war and their families. All of this had great political implications. Scholar I.A. Khan
explain it in the context of the political challenges faced by Akbar from the side of his Turani
nobility. Thus, Akbar had to search for new support groups and he turned to Rajputs as possible
allies. Jiziya, a tax on non-Muslims, was thus abolished to win them over. However, even after
adopting liberal policies like these, not all Rajput groups joined him. Thus, in 1567, Akbar
changed stance and took some aggressive measures against the rajputs. In 1567, Chittor was
attacked, and in a Fathenama issued by him after the vistory, identified it as a jihad ,
subjugation of the infidels. Around the same time, in 1569, a farman was issued to
the Muhtasib of Bilgram, to stamp out all kinds of infidel worship (idol worship) in his pargana.
However, scholars have tried to explain such vigorous attitude as an attempt to appease the
Muslim orthodoxy and to win their support.

Despite these measures in favour of the Hindus, in the early phase of his reign Akbar remained
largely Islamic. The nobility in this part was also dominated by Muslims. His inclination towards
the leading orthodox Sunni personalities prevented any overt break with the ulama and he gave
them full and independent control over the religious affairs. In his period, dominant scholars
included Makhdumul Mulk Sultanpuri and Shaikh Abdul Nabi, both were highly conservative
Sunni Mullahs. This phase kept Akbar quite busy because of his several military conquests, and
reforms implemented in revenue, military and other sectors. Thus, ulama had full control over
affairs and were never satisfied with Akbar’s concessions. Under these elements, the non-
conformists groups like the mahadawis were also persecuted.
It is widely known that the Rajputs’ were known for their bravery and the vigor with which they
fought at the battle field. Akbar saw their zeal and was so much impressed by their undaunted
courage and valor that he forthwith stopped the practice of enslaving the prisoners of war and
their forcible conversion to Islam. This was the first step of its kind taken purely on humanitarian
considerations by a Muslim ruler of India. Akbar won great applause from the people, especially
the non-Muslims, for this noble gesture.
The Hindu population was divided into three grades on the basis of their economic standing:
richest paid 48 dirhams, the middle class 24 dirhams, and the poor 12 dirhams per annum. Akbar
didn’t discriminate between his subjects on the basis of religion; instead, he was eager to
establish his reputation as an impartial ruler of all the people.
The abolition of jaziya caused a tremendous financial loss to the state exchequer. Akbar was
even opposed by Muslim ministers and bitterly criticized by the orthodox ulama for having
violated the age old tradition of the Islamic polity.

The second phase ( 1574-1580) started with a visible change in Akbar’s religious beliefs. From
his early childhood Akbar had held a special interest in the spiritual matters and had felt that the
orthodox view of Islam was not giving him the needed answers. Hence, this was a phase of
intense discussions and introspection on the part of Akbar which led to radical change in his
religious views which deeply affected his future policies. Akbar’s growing awareness of
repercussions of the traditional orthodox Sunni dominance over his administration compelled
him to an active search for new solutions. He therefore, encouraged the emergence of a new elite
group.
IBADAT KAHAN

Akbar’s next desire was to create a spirit of love and harmony among his people by eliminating
all the racial, religious and cultural barriers between them. Under the influence of Sheikh
Mubarak, he ordered in January 1575, the construction Ibadat khana- the house of worship at
fatehpur sikri. Here he initiated the practice of holding religious discourses with the learned and
the saints of the age. To begin with Akbar used to call only the Muslim theologians, including
the ulama, sheikhs and sayyads.

Muslim theologians were divided into two groups who did not see eye to eye with each other in
the matter of interpretation of the Islamic canon. Sheikh Makhdum ul mulk and sheikh abdun
nabi were the leaders of the orthodox Sunni party while Sheikh Mubarak, faizi and abul fazl
represented the group of free thinkers and liberal minded theologians. They failed to arrive on at
agreed opinions on many Islamic belief and practice.
Akbar when he realized that that the mullahs have failed to give satisfactory answers to his
yearnings for spiritual enlightenment. In disgust he threw open the gates of ibadat khana to the
priests and scholars of other religious faiths, including Hinduism, jainis, Zoroastrianism, and
Christianity.

The main aim of Ibadat khana was to resolve disputes within groups through discussions.
Initially, it was open only fort he Muslim sects, but later it was opened to the representatives of
other religions and faiths also. Akbar had a keen interest in the religious and intellectual debates
and disccusions, and thus took part in them in the hope that he would educate himself in spite of
the fact that he never got a chance to formally edcuate himself. These deliberations were not
conducted only for the sake of inquiry and search but most of the participants hoped for a way to
obatain favours and promotions from the court.

Contemporary historians like Badayuni often criticize the concept of Ibadat Khana and calls it a
place of worthless discussions. However, Abu Fazl, gives us an opposite picture and finds these
discussions very useful, which according to him guided the people away from the darkness and
enlightened them. As far as the composition of the intellectuals is concerned, Ibadat khana
included scholars from across the religions. Special efforts were made to associate distinguished
Sufis with the activities of Ibadat Khana. The debates were open to the Shias as well, Hindus
were also being favoured as the new alliance was budding between the crown and the Rajputs.
Akbar also invited Zoroastrian priests, Jesuit missionaries and Jain priests to widen the scope of
discussions. However, later we find that the confluence of different ideas led to confusion and
led the debate to no conclusion. Thus, as professor R.P Tripathi says, ” Instead of bringing credit,
the Ibadat Khana brought growing discredit. Thus, Akbar himself became convinced of the
futility of these debates, and finally closed the Ibadat Khana.

Towards the Hindu

Since Akbar was genuinely interested in securing the welfare of his subjects, he attempted to
mitigate the evil influence of the unwholesome religious and social usages that had existed in
India, even before the beginning of the Muslim rule. In 1563 A.D., he abolished the Jeziya
through outh is dominions, which in the past, had brought crores of income. Akbar described the
edict as momentous for it laid ‘the foundation of the management of mankind and enforced it, in
spite of the severe opposition of the orthodox Muslims. Similarly, he forbade infanticide, and
condemned the practice of Sati. Instructions were issued to the Kotwals to see that the act was
purely voluntary and not forced on anyone. Similarly, the imposition of the minimum age-bar, as
18 years for men and 14 years for women, was an attempt to discourage the child marriage and a
fore-runner of the Sharda Act. He also encouraged the widow remarriage. The impact of this
social reform may have been confined to a very select section of the society; nevertheless, a
beginning had been made
MAHZAR
As a result of religious discourse held at the ibadat khana, Akbar’s belief in the orthodox Sunni
Islam was shaken. And it was the orthodox Sunni mullahs who were holding predominant
position in the state politics. As a the first step toward curbing the power of the ulama, he
removed the waiz (the head priest) of the Jami masjid at fatehpur sikri and mounted himself as
the pulpit, and read the khutba in his own name as the prophet Muhammad and his succeeding
khalifas used to do.
The mullahs did not like the emperor to establish direct rapport with his subjects, who according
to them, were expected to communicate with the mass only through the agency of the imams.
Akbar did not pay any attention to their voices and went ahead with his plans to reduce the
power of the mullahs in the state politics.
This led to a proclamation, called the mahzar in September 1579. It was prepared by Sheikh
Mubarak, and signed by almost all the prominent Muslim theologians and divines of the Mughal
Empire. It recognized Akbar in his capacity as the just monarch, to be the imam-i-adil (supreme
interpreter of Islamic law). Previously the mullahs used to act as the sole arbiter of all such
disputed questions in their capacity as mujtahids (the interpreters of Islamic law). The mahzar
declared Akbar to be higher in rank than the mujtahids. It is however clear from the mahzar that
it did not deprive the mullahs of their basic right to act as the mujtahids, nevertheless, Akbar
placed himself at their head as the chief judge.

It in fact placed several limitations on Akbar which were as follows:-

●should there a religious question come up,
●regarding which the opinions of the mujtahids are at variance,
●his majesty in his penetrating understanding and clear wisdom will be able to adopt any of the
conflicting opinions existing at that point of time,
●provided always, that such order be in accordance with some verse of Quran and be of real
benefit to the nation
●and that his judgment be based on sound arguments and reasons advanced by various mullahs.
While acting in accordance with each and every one of the above conditions, will Akbar’s
decision be considered valid. The ulama fumed with anger against Akbar and started accusing
Akbar of having assumed the role of the prophet. Abul fazl refutes the charge by saying that his
theory of divine rights of kingship should not be considered as playing the prophet.
The mahzar did not give any original powers to Akbar to proclaim a new religious law. Akbar
was not permitted by the mahzar to violate the fundamental principles of Islam.

Akbar’s break from the orthodoxy is also symbolized with the propagation of
the Mahazarnama in 1579. This document, like a petition, was presented by the ulama gave the
Crown the right to accept any position in case there is conflict among the orthodoxy, and that
option will then be the final decision on the matter. This made it clear that Akbar’s position was
higher than that of the mujtahid, the interpretor of the holy laws. Many historians have provided
different opinions on the meaning and its consequence. Scholars like Vincen Smith perceives it
as an infallibility decree, influenced by papcy, stating that Akbar was influenced by the Jesuit
propagators. I.A. Khan opines that Mahzar can only be understood if we look at Akbar’s general
attitude of promoting and befriending the Indian Muslims. He wanted to show that he would not
accpet any orthodox, sharia law which lacked aql or a logical reason. S.R. Sharma argues that
Mahzar was introduced to replace the sharia laws. Scholar Nurul Hasan has discussed Mahzar at
different levels- at international level, which can be seen in the fact that Akbar never sided with
any one Islamic sect and made the Mughal state all inclusive, unlike the Ottomans who sided
with the Sunnis or the Persians who favoured the Shia sect. At political level, Mahzar made it
possible for the king to deal with the ulama and , keep the nobility under his influence and also
placing himself above the sharia law interpretations. Thus, as S.A.A. Rizvi said, the real
significance of Mahzar, it seems, was that it was the first effective declaration of the principles
of sulh-i kul which Akbar had decided to implement firmly. Hence, we can see a final breakup
between Akbar and the ulama orthodoxy.
DIN-I-ILAHI
Akbar was a religious minded and god fearing person, but being a man of action, his attachment
to the worldly affairs was very much real. He had established himself as the impartial ruler of his
subjects- Hindus as well as Muslims, and had adopted secularism as hi state policy.
He was eager to weld all the Indians, irrespective of their castes, creeds and religious beliefs and
practices, into homogenous society. Thus national integration was the ultimate goal of Akbar’s
actions.
The outcome of his deliberations was din-i-ilahi in the beginning of 1582. It was not a new
religion, nor did Akbar attempt to play the prophet. His real objective was to unite the people of
his empire into an integrated national community hy providing a common religious-cum-spiritual
platform for the meeting ground. The din-ilahi, according to J.L.Mehta, was a social religious
association of the likeminded intellectuals and saints who had transcended the barriers their
orthodox religious beliefs and practices. Abul fazl does not attach any importance to the din-i-
ilahi as being worthy of mention in Akbar-Nama. Instead he has mentioned other titles for din-i-
illahi, namely muridi (disciple), ikhlas-i-chahargana (order of four) and tauhid-i-illahi. This way
he formalized this institution so that more people would come to know about it.
A person who wanted to become a member of this organization approached abul fazl for the
purpose. They applicant was presented to Akbar with turban in his hands; he performed the
sijdah. The latter blessed him by raising him up, placed the turban back on his head and gave him
the shast (his own portrait) on which was engraved the phrase- Allah Hu Akbar. The illahias
(member of the din-i-illahi) greeted each other with the words like Allah Hu Akbar and Jalle
Jalal-E-Hu. An illahia celebrated his birth anniversary by throwing a feast to his associates and
also gave a dinner once in his lifetime. There were four grades of devotion to Akbar as the
spiritual guide of the illahias; these were in ascending order of importance-property, life, honor
and religion.

Din-i Ilahi, based largely on the philosophies of Ibn-i Arabi. Abu Fazl links Din-i ilahi with the
concept of Akbar being a spiritual guide of the people. He opines that the intention of Din-i Ilahi
was to find a common ground between the din or the religion and the duniya or the materialistic
or non-spiritual affairs.
Nizami suggests that Akbar wanted to use religion for his political advantage. As the empire
expanded, it now included people of different faiths. Thus, Akbar thought it necessary to broaden
the base of the empire. To achieve this, he tried to establish a composite governing class which
would not be discrinimated on the grounds of religion. This can be clearly seen in the case of
assimilating the Rajputs into the nobility. The Kachhwahas were the first Rajput clan to join
Akbar and also helped in the war against the other Rajput clans as seen in the Chittor campaign.
Also, we find that the historians like Badayuni and others accused Akabar of completely
abandoning Islam and created his own religion of which he was the leader. However, one cannot
see the Din-i Ilahi concept as being developed into a new religion, as it had no formal rituals,
beliefs or the holy books like the other religions. It can be seen as Akbar’s personal faith, which
he welcomed people to join in. Thus, the biases of contemporary accounts, calling Akbar a
heretic has no basis. This proves that he did not abandon Islam, and can be seen, as Athar Ali
suggests, the accusations were all from the bitter ulama, who were complaining against the curbs
put on their revenue grants and political ambitions and couldn’t digest the fact that Akbar had
moved away from their influence of an orthodox form of religion.

Sulh-i kul
Soon after Din-i Ilahi, Akbar introduced Sulh-i kul as the official policy of the empire. Sulh- i
kul was the product of the synthetic effect of the Bhakti and Sufism of the age. It was a liberal
philosophy, which translated as the universal peace. As Irfan Habib states that it meant to inform
everyone about the main spiritual truth. This can only be done by a sovereign who is a
representative of god( this link was also being advocated in his practice of din-i ilahi). Abu
Fazl’s Ain-i Akbari, put forward the theory of Rawa-i- Rozi or the social contract between the
king and his subjects. It states that like god, a king should not discriminate, in giving his
rewards amongst his subjects , on the basis of religion they follow. The sovereign, thus, had to
follow the idea of a Insaan-i kamil or the perfect man who adopts and favours the idea of
tolerance. Therefore, we find that the king, even if he did not agree with the ideas and prcatices
of other religions, he should still uphold the theory of sulh-i kul and treat everyone equally.
Evidence of this practice comes from the fact that Akbar disliked and thought poorly of his
mintier, Todar Mal as he was a devoted image worshiper and Akbar himself believed that the
god was besurat (limitless or formless). Regardless of this, Akbar gave large grants of land to
temples. Hence, the theory of Sulh-i kul propagated by Akbar denied the temporal practices of
the Din and wanted to replace it with the declaration of reason, rationale and also the rejection
of superstition. Sulh i-kul was an idea which was a result of Akbar’s experiences in while he
quenched his thirst of gaining spiritual knowledge over the years, by different media like being
close with the ulamas, instituting Ibadat Khana, Mahazarnama, the heavy influence of
Sufi Chisti silsilas and many others.

Therefore, we find that though Akbar had a dominating spiritual side to him, which were
clearly reflected in his religious policies, one cannot deny the fact that not always all his policies
were made with only this contemplation. The policies were largely propelled politically, which
by the last phase is clearly expressed in the theory of Sulh-i kul, – the theory of absolute peace,
where the subjects were not allowed to quarrel with each other and were to follow their spiritual
sovereign who’ll guide them to the ultimate truth.

Art and Literature

A long, peaceful and prosperous reign was bound t result in an unprecedented growth in the
sphere of art and literature which received the impress of the Emperor’s magnanimity and
liberalism. The splendour of his court and the extensive patronage of the intellectuals, musicians,
and artist revived the memories of the legendary Vikrmaditya. At the head of the intellectuals
stood AbulFazl and his brother Fazl. After seven years of intensive labour, AbulFazl brought
forth the voluminous and precious Ain-Akbari—an indispensable historical reference to Akbar’s
reign. Similarly Faizi’s Akbarnama has proved equally priceless for its reference value.
Badauni’s work, in spite of its obvious prejudice against theEmperor, is an important source of
information. Of the poets, Faizi’s verses in Persian were considered the most outstanding. In the
sphere of painting, Akbar was the first Sultan, who encouraged the Hindu painters to imbibe the
Persian style. Thus, he founded the Indo-Persian school of painting that reached its zenith under
Shahjehan.6 The architecture of his reign too, projected his liberalism and tolerance. It was a fine
blending of the Indo-Islamic styles. This is corroborated by AbulFazl, when he say “His Majesty
plans splendid edifices and dresses the work of his mind and heart in the garment of stone and
clay”.
Summary and Conclusion
An aspect of Akbar's religious policy that began several years after the acrimonious debates of
the House of Worship was on a different footing. His attempt to set himself up as a jagat guru,
the spiritual leader of the people, was a political interpretation. His acts such as providing
jharoka darshan to his people every day before sunrise and that of proclaiming allah hu akbar
were seen as a way of popularizing himself and providing himself legitimacy from his people.
But he in no way wanted to be next to god. Therefore he calls himself many a times as zil-li-
illahi or the shadow of the god, and the god himself.
Muslims were greatly offended by this and a reaction began against Akbar's policy which was to
destroy much that he had created. Akbar's failure was also due to forces operating outside the
court. At this time a great Hindu religious revival was sweeping the country. It commenced in
Bengal, but under Chaitanya's successors, Mathura in northern India became the great center of
resurgent Hinduism. With such developments in the country Akbar's efforts at religious
synchronization were doomed to failure. Akbar however, extricated India from the clamps of
theocracy and endeavored to fuse together the different classes of his subjects by bonds of
common citizenship and to establish a secular state.

As a Nation Builder, Emperors had won large kingdoms earlier too. But hardly anyone gad
attempted to rejuvenate the vanquished by imparting to them equality with the victorious and
increasingly associating them with the administration. Even Sher Shah had never allowed
religion to over-ride politics but the ideal of imparting equality to all men did not manifest itself
during his reign. Akbar’s empire, on the other hand, founded on the principles of equality,
universal tolerance, and the welfare of both Muslims and Hindus, proved truly national; it not
only helped Akbar to build a mighty empire but also to sustain it under his successors. He had
inherited a kingdom which was feeble and fragmented but he reinvigorated it by bequeathing the
same breadth of vision and greatness that he was endowed with. Akbar never consolidated his
despotism by trampelling or curtailing the wishes and the rights and liberties of his people;
instead, his government was unique, for it upheld throughout the twin ideal of welfarian and
humanitarian kingship.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books:
●History of Medieval India-Satish Chandra
●Ancient and Medieval India Ebook-Poonam Dalal Dahiya
●Akbar the Great Mughul: His New Policy and His New Religion:
Ahmad Bashir

Websites:
●www.academia.edu
●www.sansarlochan.in
●www.socialsciencejournal.in

THANKYOU