MAULANA ABUL KALAM AZAD

AND
SARMAD
Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture 2006
 Copyright © V.N. Datta 2007
Published 2007 by

7/16, Ansari Road, Daryaganj,

New Delhi 110 002
Sales Centres:
Allahabad Bangalore Chandigarh Chennai
Hyderabad Jaipur Kathmandu
Kolkata Mumbai Pune
All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by
any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright publishers.
Printed in India by
Saurabh Printer Pvt Ltd.
A-15-16, Sector-IV
Noida 201 301
No one can properly be said to write history but
he who understands the human heart.
Oliver Goldsmith
 CONTENTS

1. Foreword
2. Preface
3. Maulana Azad and Sarmad
4. Sarmad's Rubaiyat
5. Glossary
 FOREWORD

n the annals of Indian history, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is among the
more highly rated political figures associated with the freedom movement.
Valued for his unwavering advocacy of territorial/secular nationalism,
Maulana Azad was one of the foremost political thinkers who proved
crucial to the making of the idea of India. It is interesting, however, that the
broader intellectual persona of Maulana Azad has rarely been given a
systematic treatment from the standpoint of intellectual history. Prof. V.N.
Datta's treatment of Azad's essay on Sarmad, originally delivered as
Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture in 2006, is a refreshing attempt in this
direction.
The first section of the manuscript deals with Azad's writing on
Sarmad, and the second cites from Sarmad's Rubaiyat. The paper is based
on the author's understanding of Azad's essay on Sarmad and its
significance in the evolution of Azad's religious and political life. The
author notes that Azad was about twenty-two years old when he wrote his
essay on 'Sarmad' at the instance of Khwaja Hasan Nizami (1878-1957), a
distinguished Urdu writer, for the special shahid issue on martyrs, for his
Urdu journal Nizam ul Mushaikh, in 1910. It is generally argued that the
significance of the essay lay in the fact that Azad's abiding faith in the unity
of religions, his idea of love of humanity, his advocacy of a composite
culture and his fight for the freedom of his country all originated from what
he had expounded in his essay on Sarmad. However, the author thinks
otherwise. The author's intention is to examine why Azad wrote the paper,
what prompted him to do so, what were his feelings and thoughts and why
he chose Sarmad as the subject of his essay. The author argues that Azad
chose Sarmad since he saw in the martyr's life a mirror of his own life and
experiences.
In his essay, Prof. Datta adopts an interesting approach (originally
adopted by the likes of C.B. Macpherson)—he uses Azad's depiction of the
life of Sarmad to provide the reader with an insight into the persona of
Azad himself.1 This exercise is interesting in itself not because it gives any
really new information into the life of Sarmad, but because it reveals some
new things about Maulana Azad the person—thus we come to learn a lot
about the author, through the agency of the text and via the prism of the
protagonist.
Sarmad was a poet and scholar of Armenian Jewish extraction, who
came to India from Safavid Persia in the seventeenth century, and fell in
love with a Hindu boy. A convert to Islam, Sarmad studied Islamic
philosophy under the guidance of the renowned seventeenth century Iranian
Platonist thinker, Mulla Sadra, and had imbibed from him a fascination with
batini Islam—which emphasises the essence over the form. His sensual
infatuation with the Hindu lad helped him realise the essential purity of
transcendental love of God that the Platonists like Mulla Sadra used to
champion. The lyrical poetry and batini philosophy of Sarmad then went on
to win for him the friendship of Prince Dara Shukoh, which then in turn
proved his undoing by drawing the ire of Aurungzeb—Alamgir had Sarmad
executed for heresy.
In choosing Sarmad as a protagonist, Azad proved himself to b®
extremely liberal if not bold. Homosexual attachment is considered un-
Islamic in almost all schools of Islamic thought. While homo-sexuality has
been the subject of poetry, it never gained acceptance, let alone
respectability in the learned circles. Azad, however, despite being a
Maulana, refused to bow to conventional taboo and chose to treat Sarmad's
infatuation not as a manifestation of reprehensible carnal desire, but as one
of pure love. Sarmad's infatuation appeared to him as a ceaseless desire to
have one's own persona extinguished in the act of being in love—not unlike
the manner in which Sufi thinkers would suggest the value of being
dissolved (fanaa) in the Divine. So doing, Maulana Azad clearly stated his
own preference for the ' self-luminous understanding' of Dara Shukoh over
the 'icy reasoning' of the legalist Aurungzeb. This, it needs be appreciated,
flew in the face of the more articulate tradition among the 'ulema' of the
Indian subcontinent—though not necessarily the more predominant
tradition. Prof. Datta also adds, almost parenthetically, that Azad's own
sympathy with the personal plight of Sarmad as an unfulfilled lover was
probably motivated by Azad's failure to win the love of a particular lady.
Prof. Datta's erudition, coupled with his liberal yet measured use of
Persian quatrains (ruba'iyyat) and Urdu nazm, makes this treatment almost
as valuable as a piece of literature as it is as a work of intellectual history.
Azad's humanistic ideals are highlighted in this essay: He inspired
Indian nationalists of his generation to have faith in these ideals that were
practised by individuals even as they suffered authoritarian excesses of
Mughal rule centuries ago. Azad's convictions about universal brotherhood
are established by his frequent reference, to past examples and past
tradition. Universal brotherhood was a precept of the Sufi tradition
represented by Sarmad, the chief protagonist of Azad's essay. Datta takes us
through the pages of history, to the unfamiliar domain of Mughal history, to
the world of the ethereal and the sublime represented by humanists like
Sarmad and philosophers like Dara Shikoh. Poets and composers of the
post-Sarmad generation praised pirs like Sarmad who suffered martyrdom
during the Mughal era. It is this subject of the intellectualism of educators
and philosophers—a subject that was seldom dealt with by court historians
of the Mughal era—that Azad, and now Datta, draw our attention to. Both
are critical of this lacuna in Indian historiography. In a sense, Datta, like
Azad, feels that it is essential to reconstruct Mughal history by not
highlighting dynastic histories and court intrigues, but local sensibilities of
merchants, itinerants, scholar-travellers, faquirs from north-western India,
who spread the message of love irrespective of religion, caste or creed. This
aspect of humanism was in stark contrast to what Emperor Aurangzeb and
his court represented: unabashed authoritarianism and religious orthodoxy.
So, Azad claims that the story of Sarmad cannot be detached from the
overall political disposition in Mughal India. Throughout his treatise,
through similies, metaphors, allegories and analogies, Azad makes a clear
distinction between the good and the bad. Sarmad's spiritual quest, Dara
Shikoh's scholarly pursuits and noble qualities are indicative of an
intellectual tradition, thoroughly misrepresented and underrated in Mughal
historiography. Sarmad and Dara Shikoh were unlucky figures who were
caught unaware in the whirlwind of political intrigue. Sarmad did not defy
the authorities but upheld an alternative vision—that of spirituality and
humanism. It is this alternative vision that Azad also represented. In Datta's
treatment of Azad and in his reconstruction of Azad's autobiography, the
Tazkira, we get an impression of the transcendental awareness of Azad—of
India's pluralistic culture and humanistic tradition, represented by
personalities like Sarmad. Datta indicates that martyrdom, which Dara
Shikoh and his contemporaries like Sarmad are associated with, is a pointer
to the disintegrative aspect of Mughal rule. Perhaps, it is more useful to deal
with the intellectualism that Sarmad or Dara Shikoh represented. This new
understanding of a bygone era could stimulate discussions about India's
multicultural past. Azad's take on Sarmad and Datta's take on Azad are both
reflective of the reassessments about Mughal historiography.
Jayanta Kumar Ray
Chairman
Maulana Abul Kalam Institute of Asian Studies

__________________________
1. C.B. Macpherson (1911-1987), a distinguished Canadian political scientist was Professor of
Political Economy ata the University of Torento in 1976. He was awarded the Order of Canada, the
highest Canadian civil honour in 1976.
 PREFACE

am most grateful to Prof. Jayanta Kumar Ray for inviting me to deliver

this lecture under the auspices of Maulana Abul Kalam Institute of Asian
Studies, Kolkata. I had suggested to Dr. Ray two topics, the first on
Maulana Azad's understanding of Islam, and the other, on the discussion of
Azad's essay on Sarmad. Dr. Ray thought that the second theme on Sarmad
would be more suitable because it would be of a wider interest, especially
as too little is known of Sarmad.
In my biography of Maulana Azad published in 1990 I had dealt briefly
with Sarmad. Since then quite a number of scholars have added much to our
understanding of Azad's essay on Sarmad, and its significance in the
evolution of Azad's religious and political life. Still I felt that certain
important aspects of the essay need a further thought and analysis. Hence
this modest attempt to reinterpret Azad's essay.
In writing the text of this lecture, I have received much help and
guidance from several friends and scholars. I should like to offer my sincere
gratitude to Prof. S.A. Ali of Jamia Hamdard University, New Delhi, Prof.
Sadiq ur Rahman Kidwai, secretary, Ghalib Institute, New Delhi, Dr. Nafis
Ahmad Siddiqui, former principal, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, New
Delhi and Seema Sharma for reading and scrutinising the text and making
valuable suggestions. I am most grateful to my old and dear friend Prem
Kathpalia, I.A.S. (retired), Dr. Syeda Saiyidain Hameed, member, Planning
Commission, Dr. J.S. Grewal, Dr. Sangat Singh, and Mohammad Anwar
Hussain of Jamiat-ul-Ulema for procuring books and clarifying a number of
issues relating to Sarmad's life.
Despite my best efforts I could not persuade some of the leading
scholars of Islamic history to discuss the subject of this presentation
because they did not think it prudent to get involved in the controversial
nature of the topic. The loss is mine.
In the course of my discussions on a variety of themes, especially on
religion and its impact in different spheres of human life, I have benefitted
much from Jagmohan's extensive knowledge, M.P. and Aarti Khosla's tart
observations, and Sudhir Chandra's sceptical reserve about civil society and
I thank them. At India International Centre Library, I have depended
heavily on the ready help given by Sushma Zutshi and Kanchan for
procuring books and other material from different quarters for which I am
grateful. I also thank Dr. K.K. Banerjee, director, Raja Rammohun Roy
Library Foundation, Kolkata for supplying me with reprints of articles from
the Asiatic Society journals. I am grateful to Minakshi Mishra, programme
director, Indian Council of Cultural Relations for obtaining for me the
photos of Maulana Azad, and his grave. My special thanks to Sanjana Roy
Choudhury of Rupa for working on this study, and contributing much to its
clarity by editorial touches.
I am grateful to my daughter Nonica for pointing out some
discrepancies in my narrative. And finally, for the greatest support that my
wife Kamala has given me at every stage in my journey of academic strife,
no acknowledgement can suffice.
V.N. DATTA
 MAULANA AZAD AND
SARMAD
V.N. Datta

n my biography of Maulana Azad I had written only a paragraph on his

Urdu essay on Sarmad. I did not then realise the significance of his essay
in his emotional and intellectual life. Later I made a short presentation on
'Azad and Sarmad' at a national seminar held at the Institute of Islamic
Studies, Bombay on 24 October 1984. In the light of further research
carried out by some notable scholars in this field, I offer now an analysis of
his essay from a different perspective. Azad's essay on Sarmad became the
foundation of his religious and humanistic ideals which he tried to follow in
the course of his stormy political and religious life.2
Azad then about twenty-two years old wrote his essay on 'Sarmad' at
the instance of Khwaja Hasan Nizami (1878-1957), a distinguished Urdu
writer, for the special shahid issue on martyrs of his Urdu journal 'Nizam
ul-Mushaikh', (no.3, vol.11) on July, 1910. I think that of Azad's
biographers and writers, Dr. Malikzada Manzur Ahmad was the first author
to recognise in Azad's essay the significant roots of his religious and
political thinking that evolved as he grew older.3 For long Azad's essay
remained forgotten. Even Ian Handerson Douglas, the author of the
comprehensive biography of Azad's intellectual and religious development,
ignored it4.
While editing a reprint of Douglas's biography in 1988, G.M. Minault
and C.W. Troll had highlighted Azad's essay for tracing the impulses behind
his literary and political achievements in the national movement. Azad
wrote his essay on Sarmad two years before he was to launch his paper al-
Hilal on 12 July 1912. Malikzada Manzur Ahmad had argued in his study
that Azad's abiding faith in the unity of religions, which became a favourite
theme in his publications, the al-Hilal, and Tazkira, developed from his
essay on Sarmad.5 The editors of the Douglas volume, Minault and Troll,
also maintain that Azad's essay on Sarmad was the precursor of his
religious and political ideas, which came to guide his life.6 In a later article
Troll almost repeats what he had written earlier in his biography of
Douglas.7
In his article on 'Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, the Martyr', which he
had read at a seminar in Jamia Millia, New Delhi, December 1989 and
published later, Troll reiterates that 'the significant element in Azad's overall
outlook in life and his basic religious convictions unmistakably are
adumbrated even if largely anonymously in this essay'.8 Troll shows that
Azad's essay represents the 'true spirit of universal Islamic humanism'
which was very much in line with the Sufi tradition of Persian expression.9
Repeating his earlier views, Troll emphasises that while writing his
essay, Azad had learnt a great deal from Sarmad's life, such as his own
unflinching faith in the unity of God and brotherhood of man, his deep
commitment to the cause of Indian nationalism, his indifference to worldly
possessions, and the intrinsic value he attached to the ideals of forgiveness
and charity.10 Thus Malikzada Manzur Ahmad and Troll thought that
Azad's idea of love of humanity, his advocacy of composite culture, and his
fight for the freedom of his country, all originated from what he had
expounded in his essay on Sarmad.11 Such a perception leads these writers
to assert that Azad did not change from the time when he wrote his essay
and that he continued to uphold and affirm his faith in the unity of God and
brotherhood of man. In support of their views, they quote Professor M.
Mujeeb, who, discussing Azad's intellectual equipment, had written that
Maulana Azad 'did not change. He did not grow from being a Muslim
leader to become an Indian Statesman'.12
There is not much to disagree with the views of the above-mentioned
writers. There is certainly merit in their views of their projecting Azad's
liberal-mindedness. However, their common approach in linking and
mixing Azad's essay with his later intellectual, political and religious
development prevents us from relating his Sarmad essay to his own state of
mind, his thinking, and his range of interests.
Furthermore, it is difficult to accept Professor Mohammad Mujeeb's
view which Troll quotes that Azad 'did not change', and that he espoused
the cause of Islamic humanism which Troll calls Muslim cosmopolitanism
from the beginning. It must be emphasised that Azad's religious and
political ideas never remained static. The difference between Azad and the
traditional Muslim jurists was that Azad had an open and vibrant mind. He
assimilated ideas from whatever quarter they came, while the mullahs clung
to religious orthodoxy and were quite oblivious to the changes taking place
in the contemporary social and political conditions.
Troll states that Azad's essay on Sarmad exemplifies the kind of style
that characterises Azad's later writings in al-Hilal and Tazkira. This is quite
untrue.13 Azad's mode of writing in al-Hilal and more in Tazkira is heavy
and turgid with Arabic constructions in glittering similies and metaphors,
whereas the Sarmad essay is lucid, graphic and sprightly, free from
verbiage.

II
y focus in this paper is essentially on Azad's essay. Why did he write it
and what for? What prompted him to do so? What gave the impulse to
his composition? What were his feelings and thoughts? Why did he choose
Sarmad as his theme when Khwaja Hasan Nizami had asked him to write
for his journal? The evident answer would be that he selected the Sarmad
theme because he thought that it would be considered appropriate by the
editor of the journal, Hasan Nizami, who had strong Sufi leanings. But I
think that the reasons for Azad's choice of his subject lay deeper. Azad's
essay provides a key to the understanding of his mind, the development of
his beliefs, his character, the range of his interests, and the vitality of his
thought. Azad wrote on Sarmad because he saw in that martyr's life a mirror
of his own life and experiences.
Azad's father had died two years before he wrote this essay. He decided
not to take up his father's profession of a pir, resisting all the pressure put
upon him. Having suffered from the strict control of parental authority,
Azad was seeing all around the stranglehold of Muslim orthodoxy that was
stifling the freedom of expression and thought. Deprived of a formal
education, he could not secure a suitable job. His father had left him no
patrimony. He lived in a rented house. His literary articles, published on a
variety of themes in several well-known Urdu journals were not enough to
support him. This was also the time he went through the trauma of rejection
in love. It is clear from the last section of his autobiography, Tazkira, that an
outright rejection of his love had broken him, and that he was leaping in the
dark, not knowing how to find comfort and peace in moments of utter
dismay and dejection.14 Possibly he too was dazzled by Attiya Begum, for
whom the poet Iqbal was sighing as a lover.
Reviewing Sarmad's life—his clash with Aurangzeb, and his tragic end
—Azad seems to find comfort in his belief that Sarmad's life like his own
was also a tale of sorrow. In his essay on Sarmad we see not only Azad's
story of Sarmad's character, and what he stood for, but also most
importantly Azad's own beliefs, and the search for the meaning of life in his
own self.
The character and personality of Sarmad eludes us like a wraith each
time we step forward to grasp it. This is largely due to lack of source-
material on him. Historians of the time refrained from writing on Sarmad
because it was the emperor at whose hands he had suffered. Court historians
gloat over the victories of the high and mighty, but seldom write on the
suffering of victims. An avenging force of fact is that we have so far not
produced a coherent and convincing history of the victims of oppression
and injustice. Despite the best efforts to be objective, the sensitive writers,
gifted with enormous learning and imaginative sympathy, fail to overcome
bias. The classical work, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire not only
gives us insight into the circumstances that had led to the ruin of Roman
Empire, but also throws light on the mind of its author Edward Gibbon, his
anti-Christian bias, and the social and intellectual temper of the eighteenth
and early nineteenth century era of European Enlightenment.
Azad laments that due to paucity of literature on Sarmad very little is
known about him. He had to rely mainly on two Persian sources, the first
Mirat ul-Khyal by Sher Khan Lodi written in 1691-92 about thirty years
after Sarmad's death in 1661-62 and the second Riyad ush-Shuara, a treatise
on the lives of Persian poets by Ali Quli Khan Daghisttani Walih, a
nobleman who had lived in the reign of Mohammed Shah Rangila and
depended on the eye-witness account of Sarmad's trial by a sufi called
Khwaja Ibrahim. Badakhshani15. The treatise was written in 1748 about
ninety years after Sarmad's death. Azad also used bits of material from the
poetic composition of a good-hearted poet Siraj ud Din, who had lived in
the times of Alamgir II (1754-1759)16.
In his essay Azad gives us a brief life-sketch of Sarmad whose original
name was Muhammad Said with Sarmad as his takhallus. Born of
Armenian Jewish stock at Kashan, an important business center in Iran
during the times of Shah Abbas the Great, he was converted to Islam. A
poet and scholar, he was well-versed in the study of comparative religions.
He had studied under the guidance of profound scholars of philosophy such
as Mullah Sadr ud-Din Muhammad bin Ibrahim Shirazi, known as Mullah
Sadra and his contemporary Mir Abdul Qasim Findarski and other men of
letters17.
Azad tells us that Sarmad had in him a wanderlust which brought him
to trade in India in AD 1632 when he was about forty-two. He settled in
1632-1633 at Thatta or Tatta, the capital and port of Sind. There he fell in
love with a Hindu lad of vaishya caste with whom he was so infatuated that
he gave up his business and became a naked faqir. Love attains in a moment
what hard work over centuries cannot. Sir Jadunath Sarkar identified the
Hindu lad as Abhay Chand18. Sarmad gives the following reason for his
infatuation and casting off clothing as faqir.
Khush balai-ye karda chunin past mara
Chashm-ha ba du jam burda az dast mara
Oo dar baghal-e man ast wa man dar talbash
Duzd-e ajab-e brehna karda ast mara.

A luscious beauty has vanquished me

His eyes with their two goblets have robbed me of myself
He fell in my arms and I am in his quest
An extraordinary robber has stripped me naked19

Azad points out that in the case of Sarmad it was his sensual love of the
Hindu lad that taught him to apprehend the purity and depth of Divine love.
This represents the transference of human love to something spiritual—
from the temporal to sacred. Making use of the pun on trade, Azad wrote:
 Originally, Sarmad's occupation was trade but the young trader who
went to India in a fit of absent-mindedness knew not in what trade he would
stake his wealth......he would have to trade in the marketplace of beauty and
love instead of silver and gold.20
In Tazkira, his later publication, Azad too had stated in poetic prose that
his deep love for a woman and her physical beauty had inspired him, but his
overtures to win her favour had failed. Going through this experience of
rejected love affair brought him to the meaning of suffering and the vision
of Divine love. Thus it appears that Azad too had passed through the same
stages of physical love, suffering and a beatific vision of Divine love as
Sarmad. For the realization of their object, Sarmad's and Azad's
experiences, perspectives and goals look similar.
Picking up the thread of his essay after the account of Sarmad's
infatuation of the Hindu boy, Azad then waxes lyrical over the force,
passion and virtues of love. The subject of romantic love was close to
Azad's heart. While writing on Sarmad's love episode and its impact on his
life, Azad is in fact drawing his thoughts and reflections from his own
experience of the betrayed and thwarted love, which had initially shattered
him. Love for Azad is a priceless boon, an opening of a whole universe for
moral and spiritual upliftment, and a journey in the pursuit of self-
perfection.
Azad is very clear in his mind that in the realm of love the preliminary
step in its journey is physical love, which possesses enough vitality and
strength to flower into spiritual love. Illustrating it, he refers to the strict,
stern and puritanical disciplined mullah who, absorbed in offering prayers
to God, cannot resist images floating before his mind's eye, of roving
beauties and handsome lads promised in paradise21. Sensual feeling forms
the nucleus of love. He refers to Yakubs' vision that was restored the
moment the smell from his son Yusuf (Joseph)'s garment was wafted to
him22.
For Azad, there is no love without suffering, and where there is
suffering, there is holy ground. According to Azad, it is the pain inflicted by
love that rejuvenates human spirit, leading to self-realization, self-
purification, and self-illumination, enriching and enhancing the quality of
life. He declares that love is an unending quest for Truth; it is the
renunciation of worldly ties and a ceaseless quest for the vision of Reality,
and the union with the Supreme Divine. He doubts whether anybody who
has not been bewitched by an intoxicating beauty and seized with
passionate quest, could ever visualize the sweetness and Divine light which
Moses saw, as he fainted23.
On Sarmad's business of love, Azad wrote:
mara farokht muhabbat wali na-midanam
ke mushtari che kas ast o bahai ma chand ast.

Love has sold me but I do not know

Who has bought me and what is my worth.24

Again:
Yek-e az dastgiri hai ishq ast
Azizan ra bakhwari bar kashidan

One of the ways love follows is

To drag its favourites into disgrace25

To emphasise that love and rationality are incompatible, Azad quoted

the following verse:
Dar Ajeeb hai taur-i ishq hikmat ha kam ast
Aql ra ba maslehat-andeshi-e-majnu che kar

In the wonders of the style of love

The place for wisdom is minimal
Love has nothing to do with what
Majnun thinks best.26

As the saying goes, 'That it is impossible to love and to be wise'.27

For Azad, love is to suffering what a duck is to water; and the path of
love is strewn with thorns, but there is no need to be disheartened, assures
Azad.
Ba yek do zakhm ke khurdan se ishq amn mubash
ke dar kamangah abroo kaman kashast hanuz.

If you have received one or two wounds at the hands of love,

do not think that you are safe
Because the archer is still there, hidden in the ambush of the eyebrows.28
 Thus for Azad love is the power that moves and sustains the universe, it
is that which human soul realizes in its union with the ultimate reality,
fulfilling thereby life's purpose.
In the next two pages Azad provides a brief sketch of the period when
Sarmad was drawing closer to Dara Shikoh (1615-1659), the heir
presumptive. Sarmad came to Delhi in 1654. Dara Shikoh introduced him to
Emperor Shahjahan as a scholar of repute, well-versed in comparative
religion and occult sciences. Azad gives a vivid, sensitive and succinct
account of the noble qualities of Dara's character, especially his religious
and literary accomplishments.29 He asserts that in the entire Mughal period,
there was none to equal as a man of extraordinary intellect and humanistic
outlook. Azad laments that Dara's real image as a scholar and rare human
being had been tarnished by a virulent propaganda carried against him by
his adversaries.30
In his essay, Azad's aim was not to chronicle Dara Shikoh's life, but to
highlight some of the striking features of his personality, particularly, the
working of his mind, his inwardness, and his spiritual quest. According to
Azad, Dara Shikoh, a profound scholar, was a friend of the poor and the
needy. He relished the company of the dervish and faqir. Azad also thought
that Dara was a man of exquisite taste and affable manners, who in his
spiritual quest, makes no distinction between a temple and a mosque, and
with a generosity of temper shows the same reverence to a Muslim faqir
and a Hindu dervish.31
Summing up the appreciation of Dara Shikoh, Azad affirms the broad
and catholic temper of the prince who was free from religious sectarianism.
Dara Shikoh's contemporary Niccolao Mannucci in his Storia do Migor
India had also maintained that Dara Shikoh was a man of amiable
disposition, who respected all religions equally32. From Azad's account of
Dara Shikoh it is fair to infer that for Azad too, a temple and mosque were
just symbols, representing a universal faith in the love of God, transcending
religious distinctions.
Azad next focuses on the political changes that were taking place in the
history of Mughal India-Emperor Shahjahan's illness, Dara Shikoh's defeat,
and Aurangzeb's succession to the throne in 1658 which came as
unmitigated disaster for Dara Shikoh and his associates.33 In the new
dispensation there was no place for Dara Shikoh and his like. That is why
Dara Shikoh and his supporters fled to save their lives, while those who
chose or were compelled to stay back met the fate that awaited them.34 But
Sarmad, whom Azad calls the tiger Ali, was made of sterner spirit, and held
fast to Delhi, leading the life of a Sufi, completely indifferent to what was
going on around him. He was cultivating his own garden unobtrusively.35
Azad comes to the last part of his essay, the denouement, his tragic
execution and his martyrdom. But at this stage it is appropriate to note
Azad's perceptive observations on the purpose and meaning of history,
which reflected his profound historical sense. According to Azad, history is
not a dogma or fixed entity, but a speculative exercise, a surmise, and an
interim assessment in which the subjective element is a vital factor. In other
words, history for Azad was a patternless, inchoate affair, the view held by
some of the eminent historians of our time, H.A.L. Fisher, Herbert
Butterfield, and E.H. Carr.
Azad brings in sharp relief the differing tempers of Dara and
Aurangzeb. His own sympathy was for the self-luminous understanding of
Dara Shikoh than for Aurangzeb's icy reasoning. In one case there were
luminous intimations, which had excited Dara, and in another, there was
Aurangzeb's strict adherence to law and casuistry36. And yet Azad passed
no verdict. Azad believed like Sarmad that in religion there are no doctrinal
propositions.
Whatever may be the case with Alamgir's soberness, we prefer Dara Shikoh's love of madness
and his loss of reason. Because in the case of former we have the sword of sobriety, stained with
those killed in grief, whereas in the case of the latter, rivers of blood flow from the jugular veins
of his own body. Possibly, too, Dara Shikoh was annoyed with the sobriety of Alamgir and
therefore preferred the company of 'mad' people like Sarmad to the assembly of the sober37.

Azad tries to explain why Aurangzeb took the drastic step of executing
Sarmad? What was Aurangzeb's object? Sarmad was not Aurangzeb's rival,
and posed no threat to him. Nor was he influential enough to pitch his
forces against Aurangzeb to topple him. So what was Aurangzeb's anxiety?
Azad does not view Sarmad's execution in isolation but puts the story in the
widest possible framework by setting it against the general history of Islam.
Azad wrote:
 Throughout the thirteen centuries of Islam the pen of the jurists has been an unsheathed sword
and the blood of thousands of truth-loving persons stains their verdicts (fatwa). Whichever angle
you study the history of Islam, countless examples will illustrate how whenever a ruler came to
the point of shedding blood, the pen of mufti and the sword of a General rendered him equal
service. This was not confined to the Sufis and nobles; for those 'ulema who were close to the
seers of the mysteries of truth and reality also had to suffer misfortunes from the hands of the
jurists and in the end obtained deliverance in giving their lives. Sarmad, too was murdered by
the same sword38.

About politics Azad makes a comment, which is pertinent today that

thousands of lives have been sacrificed in the name of religion for political
reasons39. He castigates the self-righteous, dogmatic and narrow-minded
Muslim jurists who in the name of religion have committed heinous crimes
and brought misery to people40.
From Azad's account it is evident that Aurangzeb was looking for some
way to ensnare Sarmad so that he could inflict on him a condign
punishment. Various charges were framed against Sarmad. Firstly, Sarmad
was held guilty of heresy for composing the following ruba'i:
Har kas ke hakiktash pa dar shud
oo pahan tar az sipar pehnadar shud
Mullah goyed kay bar falak shud Ahmad
Sarmad goyed falak ba Ahmad dar shud

He who understood the mystery of Reality

became vaster than the vast heaven
Mullah says that Mohammed ascended the Heavens
Sarmad says that the Heavens descended to Mohammed41.

The mullahs felt enraged at the ruba'i because they thought that it
flagrantly violates the tenet of Miraj or the Prophet's ascension to heaven,
where he attains the vision of Allah. This was considered heresy.
Sarmad was produced before the Chief Qazi Mullah Qawi with the title
Itmad Khan, on the charge of adopting nudity as his way of life. Mumtad
Khan, a noble in Shahjahan's court had written, 'I found him (Sarmad)
naked covered with thick crisped hair all over the body and with all
fingers42.'
Nudity in public was held not only an infringement of the rules of social
conduct but also the defiance of the laws laid down by the Sharia. Sarmad
repeated his former ruba'i in defence, but the mullahs felt enraged at his
audacity, and declared that his public nudity was outrageous, enough to
warrant his execution43. But Aurangzeb thought otherwise. He wanted
something more substantial to take action against Sarmad. He knew that
Sarmad was no ordinary man—he was very learned, and had a large
following of admirers in Shahjahanabad44.
Aurangzeb then decided to deal with Sarmad in his own way.
Straightaway he asked Sarmad whether he had predicted sovereignty for
Dara Shikoh to which Sarmad replied, 'God has given him (Dara) eternal
sovereignty, and my prediction has not proved false45'. It was widely known
in Shahjahanabad that Sarmad was in the habit of uttering only the first two
words of the sacred Kalima Tayeba La illah but not the third, ill allah.
Sarmad's detractors thought that such an ignoble manner of violating the
sanctity of God's holy word was sacrilegious. The jurists asked Sarmad to
quote the Kalima, but as was his habit, Sarmad spoke only the first two
words46.
At Sarmad's insolence in refusing to recite the full Kalima, the mullahs
became agitated and raised a hue and cry condemning his action as impious.
Unperturbed and unrepentant Sarmad replied that he was still stuck in the
quagmire of negation, and had not reached the spiritual height of
affirmation47. How could he proclaim what does not come from the heart,
Sarmad said. The mullahs, condemning his act as heresy warned him to
repent or to face death48.
Defending Sarmad's stand, Azad writes that a man of Sarmad's sterling
character and courage could not be cowed by mullahs' threats49. Sarmad
regarded verbal wrangling over religious text as an utterly futile exercise
which smothers the true love of God. Of this Azad writes in a poetical vein.
Sarmad stood on the minaret of love from which the walls of Kaba and Temple could be seen
just opposite and where the flags of truth and unbelief waved together50.

Admiring Sarmad's free thinking and humanitarianism, Azad writes that

for Sarmad a temple and mosque were symbols and expressions of the same
reality, God, in which notions of faith and unbelief are extinguished for
ever, and he quotes a verse:
Kishwari hast ke dar wey raivad as kufr-e sukhan
Hatnaja guft o shono bar sarey iman naraivad
 There is a territory where people talk of unbelief also
Not everywhere conversation centres on faith only.51

Appreciating Sarmad's refusal to recite the Kalima, Azad writes: 'Why

should Sarmad have said, 'It exits', concerning something he had not seen.
To speak of what was outside his own experience of apprehending the
Divine reality would be nothing but a blatant lie. Azad adds: 'Sarmad's
crime was that he drank the cup in public, while others drank in private52'.
In other words, Sarmad did not wish to be a hypocrite in proclaiming what
was not the truth for him. Thus, the way lay clear for his execution.
Azad evokes the memory of Husain ibn Mansur Hallaj, who like
Sarmad, had met a similar fate. Mansur was executed in the year AD 922 in
Baghdad for his supposedly blasphemous public declaration, 'Ana al-Haq (I
am the truth or the God')53. Imam Shafi'i, one of the four Imams of Iraq in
the early tenth century AD found him guilty of the breach of Tradition, and
the denunciation of God.
Reflecting on Sarmad's refusal to utter the holy Kalima and his
execution, Azad writes that a pilgrim's journey in quest of the Divine is
hard, and not easy to reach, and this applies not only to Sarmad but to many
others, who, inspired by the same passion as Sarmad's stiffen their faith to
continue their quest to apprehend Divine reality. According to Azad, for a
spiritual-seeker the quest is itself the consciousness of Truth54.
Before Sarmad was executed, his close associate and admirer
Asadullah, a dervish, pleaded with him to recant, and save his life, but
Sarmad refused to yield55. He recited his verse.
Umr ast ke awazha-ye Mansur kuhan shud
man az sarey nau jalwa daham dar o rasan ra

The ancient voice of Mansur's execution has long been forgotten

Now is the time to recompense the Tradition.56

Azad does not weep or moan over Sarmad's execution. On the contrary,
he looks upon it as a lover's funeral, a bridegroom's procession heading to
its destination in full splendour. Dwelling on the impact of Sarmad's
martyrdom, Azad concludes that the essence of 'love is sacrifice'.57 To him
love is a symbol of the scaffold, a complete submission to the Will of
God.58 Such a noble sacrifice never goes futile. On the contrary, it sets a
higher watermark for aspiring to the finest human values for generations to
come.
Leaving the realm of history, Azad recounts a popular belief that
prevailed in Shahjahanabad after Sarmad's death that the two syllables
illallah, which he had refused to utter, began to be heard thrice. Azad also
recalls a legend that a reliable source attested that Sarmad's severed head
had begun to echo the Kalima, and sing a hymn in praise of God. Although
Azad comments that such make-believe accounts cannot be trusted, and that
a distinction must be drawn between a myth and reality, he also makes
allowance for fantasy to which human nature is susceptible and gives
credence.59
Azad lets his imagination flow, and writes: 'In spring we have seen the
blooming flowers, and in autumn the gloomy and dry branches commune
with each other.' Azad asks, 'What then or how is it if the perceptive
individual love-intoxicated continues to hear Sarmad's voice ringing and
seeing his lips quiver'.60
Aurangzeb had ascended the Mughal throne in June 1659. About three
years later Sarmad was beheaded (1661-62). Azad quotes a verse which
means that the blood that is shed for love never goes waste.61 Azad avers
that for Sarmad's execution, Aurangzeb was bound to suffer. Like an exile,
Aurangzeb died forsaken in a forlorn distant place.62 But Azad desists from
passing strictures on Aurangzeb's execution of Sarmad. He has reasons to
believe that there may be other considerations that played a part in
Aurangzeb's act.63
Azad does not claim to have found the truth on the circumstances
leading to the execution. He only emphasizes that 'in the story of love there
is no place for hatred and vindictiveness'64. He writes that "in the Religion
of Love rancour and animosity are forbidden".65 Here the highest act of
worship is to submit to the executioner, who leaps with a sword in his hand,
and if possible, to kiss his hand'.66 Azad closes his essay with the following
verse:
Shud ast seena zahuri pur az mohabbat-e yar
barai keena-e aghyar dar dilam ja neest
 Zohuri's breast is full to the brim with the love of the beloved There is no place left in my heart
for hating my rivals.67

III
armad was held guilty on the charge that he insisted on repeating only the
first two syllables of the Kalimah, La ilaha, but not the rest, ilia Allah.
The Kalimah La ilaha ilia Allah is not found in the Quran but is mentioned
in a Tradition called Hadith-i-Jibrail68. According to the Tradition as
narrated by Ibn Umar, the Prophet had declared that Islam was founded on
five basic principles, the first being, the Kalimah, ashhadu an La ilaha ilia
Allah Wa ashhadu anna Muhammadun rasid Allah (there is no God, except
Allah and Mohammad is Allah's messenger), second, offering prayers five
times a day, third, paying Zakat, fourth, Hajj, and fifth, fasting during the
Ramadan69. Aurangzeb's contention was that Sarmad by refusing to recite
the Kalimah, and uttering only the first two syllables was setting a bad
example for others to follow and exceeding all limits in defying the social
and religious conventions of Islamic faith and tradition. So for this ignoble
act of apostasy, he was duty-bound, and within his legitimate rights as a
sovereign to order Sarmad's execution.
Azad defends Sarmad on the ground that he was speaking the truth
because in the spiritual sphere Sarmad had not yet reached the stage of
Divine Truth and Plenitude. Azad does not elaborate on Sarmad's refusal to
utter the Kalimah. Probably he did not think it necessary. A Sufi has his
own way of life, and his own experiences cannot be transmitted to others.
Like a pilgrim, Sarmad was struggling to grasp the fundamentals of
Supreme Reality. There are several grades and stages through which a Sufi
has to pass through learning and meditating in order to reach the final goal
of God or Divine Bliss. Sarmad was probably conscious of his limited
spiritual experience. In other words, Sarmad may have felt that his life was
not yet pure enough to feel the touch of Divine manifestation in the
universe.70
Aurobindo Ghosh has discussed the notion of Affirmation and Negation
in his book The Life Divine where he says:
Pure Being is the affirmation by Unknowable of Itself as the free base of all cosmic existence.
We give the name of Non-Being tc a contrary affirmation of Its freedom, mat is to say from all
 positive terms of actual existence which consciousness in the universe can formulate to itself,
even from the most abstract, even from the most ranscendent.

To Aurobindo Ghosh, negation may not be growth, but it does prepare

for growth. A simultaneous Affirmation and Negation are complementary
to each other and, like all contraries the Non-Being permits the Being, even
as the silence permits the activity71'. Thus negation, even though conceived
as opposition to Gou, and viewed as a perverse form of love, is regarded
a*-, the means to self-realisation and salvation. Aurobindo Ghosh's
argument is Hegelian in spirit—thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Azad does
not discus these metaphysical questions in his essay. But Aurobindo
Ghosh's formulation has a striking relevance to Sarmad's refusal to affirm
what he has not experienced. Negation is common to all philosophic faiths,
and serves as an intrinsic part of the journey towards Self or God
realisation, which can be an inspiring experience. Understanding through
negation is the basis for the idea of neti, neti—not this, not that, which the
sage Yajnavalkya uses in the Brihadaranyakopanishad to describe
Brahman, the Absolute. It is only by moving forward, step by step, that
unity with Parama Shiva, the Absolute, is realised.
Some leading Western scientists and philosophers dismiss mysticism
and its idealistic beliefs as daydreaming and self-delusion that retard the
spirit of rational thinking. They sneer at the spirit of renunciation, and view
the experiences of mystic trance as some kind of catalepsy. Initially,
Bertrand Russell too had rejected mysticism. He warned that mysticism is
supposed to give its practitioner insight, but if untested and unsupported,
provides insufficient guarantee of truth. Later Russell wrote that 'universal
love and joy in all that exists is of supreme importance for the conduct and
happiness of life and gives inestimable value to the mystic emotion apart
from any creeds that may be built upon it'. Trying to come to terms with
some aspects of mysticism, Russell states that 'mystic emotion reveals a
possibility of a nobler happiness and freer life than any that can be
otherwise achieved'.72
From our preceding account, it is evident that Azad was in a disturbed
state of mind when he wrote his essay on Sarmad in 1910. He was trying to
clarify in his mind some of the issues that caused him anxiety. His essay on
Sarmad turned out to be for him an exercise in self-introspection, a kind of
cathartic venture. As noted, Azad had no regular employment to make his
living. His passionate love affair had ended in failure. Torn by several
conflicts, he was seeking comfort.
It is not uncommon in the vicissitudes of human affairs, that a
passionate sensual love, which the poet Iqbal called Ishq-e majazi is
transmuted into a quest for Divine love.
Iqbal wrote:
Kabhi ay hakikat-e muntzar nazar a labas-e majaz main
Ke hazaron sajdeh tarap rahe hain teri jabin-e niaz main

Jo main sar basajda hua kabhi to zamin se aane lagi sada

Tera dil to hai sanam-ashna tujhe kya milega namaz main

O Truth, that is to be apprehended, manifest Thyself in the form of physical beauty.

Because hundreds of protestations in my forehead
are struggling to fall in stark humility at thy feet.

When I bowed in reverence to thee, a voice came from within

Futile will be your prayer when you are drawn to physical beauty

Azad was going through emotional turmoil when he began writing his
essay In the process of examining Sarmad's life he felt he was unraveling
much of the confusion he was experiencing himself. Azad's purpose was
not to discus Sarmad as a Sufi or a poet, though he was well-qualified to do
so, but his object was entirely different. By focusing on episodes of
Sarmad's life, he was trying to find such human values that bring peace and
comfort and enrich the quality of life.
What is the thought-content of Sarmad's essay? What are its leading
ideas? His essay throws as much light on Sarmad's beliefs as on the
working of the Mughal state. There are four dramatis personae in the tragic
act, whom Azad presents in his esay: Dara Shikoh, Sarmad, the Muslim
jurists, and Emperor Aurangzeb. Azad's object was to play up the clash
between a bold, sturdy and fearless individualist like Sarmad on the one
hand, and the power-hungry, self-righteous jurists backed by the willful
despotism of the Mughal state, headed by Emperor Aurangzeb, on the other.
In other words, the essay demonstrates conflicting perspectives, one of an
honest, Godfearing, straightforward, sensitive and independent-minded
individual, and the other of a devious, scheming clerisy and a ruthless
authoritarian ruler.
 Aurangzeb had already settled his account with Dara Shikoh two years
earlier by executing him on a charge of heresy in 1659 for aligning himself
with infidelity. In his Majma ul-Bahrain Dara Shikoh had observed that the
Upanishads too had proclaimed the unity of Being as did the Quran73. Azad
makes it absolutely clear that in the execution of Sarmad (1661-2),
Aurangzeb was motivated purely by political considerations and that it had
nothing to do with religion. Dara Shikoh used to address Sarmad as his
guide and preceptor74. According to Azad, Aurangzeb was bent on
punishing Sarmad for his close association with Dara Shikoh. To win public
approval for his vindictive act, Aurangzeb took every care to project
Sarmad as a notorious foresaker of Islamic principles, who refused to
accept the inviolate article of faith of all Muslims, la illaha ill Allah.
From the case of Sarmad and his persecution, Azad goes ahead to
generalise that throughout history, rulers and other political powers have
always continued to misuse religion for political purposes, and Sarmad too
like other victims had to bear the onslaught for no fault of his own. Azad
also shows how the Muslim jurists, the so-called defenders of Islamic faith,
in obedience to the dictates of their master, the emperor, deviously built up
the case to justify Sarmad's execution. Azad's essay is a subtle satire on the
waywardness and oppression of Aurangzeb's mode of governance.
M. Mujeeb in his play Khana Jungi weaves the tragic story of Sarmad's
execution ordered by Aurangzeb. He shows here how Sarmad's individual
rights were challenged and violated by Aurangzeb's ruthlessness. He asserts
that the court of 'ulema had no juridical or moral authority to try Sarmad',
who as a Sufi was quite free to choose the way he lived. In other words,
legality and state intervention were completely irrelevant to the life of a
Sufi75.
Those who do not agree with the view that Aurangzeb was motivated
by political considerations, argue that it was Sarmad's mode of living,
especially his nudity that had offended the emperor, who took drastic
action. It has also been argued also that Sarmad's following ruba'i infuriated
Aurangzeb.
An kas ke tura taaj-e jahanbani daad
Mara hamah asb aab-e pareshani daad
Poshand libaas har kira aib-e deed
Be-aibaan ra libaas-e uryani dad.
 He that gave you sovereignty
gifted to me cause for anxiety.
He covered the blemished
And gave nudity to the unblemished76.

Obviously, the ruba'i meant that Aurangzeb is the blemished one if

indeed it had been addressed to him. But there is no evidence to suggest that
this ruba'i was addressed to Aurangzeb and the Muslim jurists when he
faced them on the charge of heresy. Azad has not included the ruba'i in his
essay though he was not surely ignorant of it. Probably he did not find any
clear evidence of Sarmad reciting it while facing Aurangzeb when he was
being cross-examined, although it is likely that the ruba'i was popularly
known.
In concluding his essay Azad did not add a portion of Aurangzeb's
criticism. Sarmad accepted the ordeal without bitterness or protest. Then
Azad asks why should we be so presumptuous as to criticise the Alamgir
especially since we know so little of historical facts which have not been
established with certainty. Here Azad gives the benefit of doubt to
Aurangzeb on the ground that a historical fact is relative, and can be seen
from many different angles, particularly when an event took place centuries
ago. Those who try to interpret it live so far removed in distant time cannot
be certain of the conditioning circumstances that had compelled Aurangzeb
to take the drastic action of executing him. Azad shows here the spirit of a
true historian, restraint and caution in interpreting events.77.

IV
rom Azad's study of Sarmad, what emerges is the portrait of a man who
was enlightened, selfless, humble, decent and above all, a courageous
man, not to be cowed by anyone, however mighty his opponent. Sarmad
represents the finest values of Islam. Azad presents him as a great humanist,
a man of strong liberal spirit imbued with universalist outlook, transcending
caste, creed and religion. Making no distinction between temple and
mosque, Sarmad upholds the doctrine of Wahdat-e Adyan, the oneness of all
religions. Sarmad's religion was love, the supreme principle of life.
Aurangzeb to Azad represents a narrow, one-dimensional view of society as
contrasted with Sarmad's commitment to pluralistic culture, a co-existence
and toleration. To a person like Sarmad numberless array of paths lies open
for the truth. It is also akin to the Advaita monism in Vedic philosophy
wherein Absolute reality (Brahman) is one, called through different names.
As the Rig Veda saying goes 'Ekam sad viprah bahudha Vadanti'. 'Truth is
one which the wise call by different names. Azad saw Aurangzeb standing
for a stern rationality, and a literal adherence to law, overlooking the spirit
of universal love which is the core of religion. Aurangzeb slipped into
personalising a cause, which he tried to show as public and religious.
Aurangzeb and his time-serving followers wanted to impose their views on
Sarmad, but as a man of tearing spirit, Sarmad would never, never give in.
He refused to bend knees to their authority. Comparing the religious policy
of Aurangzeb and his great-grandfather Akbar, Maulvi Abdul Wali wrote:
While Akbar, on the one hand, encouraged a section of his subjects, he,
on the other hand, committed the fatal mistake of repressing the orthodox
Muhammadan subjects. The reaction was surely to come, but when it did
come, Akbar's great grandson, Aurangzeb, too, committed the same suicidal
policy of encouraging a section of his people and repressing the other
section78.
Azad wove the fabric of his narrative out of the meager contemporary
historical evidence and lit it up with images and metaphors drawn from
Islamic history. Maulana Shibli, a renowned Islamic scholar, complimenting
Azad for his unique achievement in filling out the character of Sarmad,
wrote 'we have no more biographical facts than those given by Azad. But he
has expanded them considerably. He has, in fact, produced a full twenty
pages. Had I written it, I would have managed it in hardly two pages.'79
Khwaja Hasan Nizami for whom Azad had written the essay, sad in his
edited note to the composition, that Azad's composition was 'an inebriated
and original sermon on the stages of the Sufa path'.80
As noted, Azad evokes the martyrdom of Mansur al Hallaj who was
brutally murdered in Bhagdad for declaring 'Ana al-Haq'. In Hindu
philosophy Sankaracharya's great saying from the Upanishads representing
the Advaita spirit, 'Aham Brahmaasmi' or 'Aham Atma Brahma' (This self is
Brahman) is much the same as Mansur's Ana al-Haq? In Judaism it is
Jehova (I am that I am), and in Sikkhism, it Ik Onkar (All is one). It means
that all creation is the manifest form of God, that all is one. Islamic history
witnesses several cases of martyrdom in which men of character did not
hesitate to stake their lives to fight injustice and tyranny. Imam Husain, the
grandson of the Prophet, refused to recognise the sovereignty of Yazid, the
tyrant of Damascus, and died fighting in Karbala in Iraq (AD 10 October
680). Edward Gibbon comments in his Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, 'in a distant age and climate the tragic scene of the death of Hosein
will awaken the sympathy of the coldest reader'.81
In European history Socrates (470 BC-399 BC) was held guilty by the
Greek council of state for the heinous crime of not worshipping the gods of
the state and inventing new ones, and thereby corrupting the youth by new
devices. The court proposed a fine of thirty mina which some of his friends
were willing to pay as surety. Socrates declined the opportunity to escape.
For upholding his liberty of thought, Socrates had to drink the hemlock. He
died in 399 B.C. Jesus Christ (6 BC—AD 30) was condemned by the High
Priest, and a Jewish council under Roman law for his attack on the
hypocrisy of the privileged classes, and for supporting the cause of the poor.
However, he was crucified. The Roman general and statesman Julius Ceaser
(100 BC—15 March 44 BC) can by no means be called a martyr despite his
assassination by a group of senatorial conspirators; including Marcus
Brutus. Ceaser did not stand an ideal but was thwarting the spirit of the
Republican mode of governance in the Roman Empire for a personal
ambition.
J.S. Grewal, the historian, maintains that martyrdom from an
ideological angle is an inbuilt feature of the Khalsa tradition. For service of
the Panth and justice, Sikhs were taught to prepare themselves to endure
suffering to the point of martyrdom. Citing the heroic examples of
martyrdom, Grewal refers to Guru Arjan Dev, Teg Bahadur, Bhai Mani
Singh, Bota Singh and others82. Sarmad too joins a galaxy of martyrs, who
took a principled stand against the 'oppressors' wrong, and faced death.
Azad's Sarmad remained undefeated in defeat. Then who was the moral
victor: Aurangzeb or Sarmad—that remains the question?
Azad's essay on Sarmad is a remarkable achievement of a twenty-three
year old young-man, who shows in it a mastery of Islamic history. It also
shows how the discipline of life had shaped his character. His essay is a
chapter in his mental history that provides intellectual satisfaction and also
imaginative pleasure to his readers. His composition is a literary gem,
balanced and admirably lucid, written in a free, flowing style and
maintaining a high sense of proportion. His examples drawn from Islamic
history are well-chosen and relevant to the theme. It is likely that Azad may
have sought Maulana Shibli's advice while writing his essay. In his literacy
pursuits, Azad remained closely in touch with Shibli.
Azad's essay on Sarmad reflects the spirit of a Romantic. There is
evident in it a free play of wit and imagination. His prose is lyrical at
places. His essay is fragmentary and a bit diffuse, not compact or balanced.
He leaves too much for the reader to imagine. His narrative demonstrates
that he finds no place for the cold and stiff rationality in the organisation of
man and society. On the contrary, he prefers the spontaneous, the
inspirational and the heroic. His essay reflects what Keats had called the
'Negative capability' which means a writer's ability to accept uncertainty,
mystery, doubts, without any irritable reaching after facts and reason. In his
poem 'Chiragh-e-Daer', the poet Ghalib wrote that Danish kar nakushiad
janun kun, meaning that it is not rationality that resolves problems, but
higher consciousness, higher mind, the illumined apprehension of senses,
the supermental.
Sarmad remains Azad's hero, an exceptional figure, a lover of divine
beauty and truth who jealously guards the autonomy of his character against
the onslaught of state power. In his essay, the centre of Azad's story is the
universal human soul, and its quest.
Azad has paid a high and just tribute to Sarmad for the integrity and
courage of a good man, fearless championing of independent thinking,
liberty and pluralism. Azad's Sarmad bears close resemblance and affinity
with Camus's 'Outsider' who too had the courage to die for the truth. In his
Afterword, Albert Camus wrote:
So for me, Mearsault (the Outsider), is not a reject, but a poor and naked man, in love with the
sun which leaves no shadows. Far from lacking all sensibility, he is driven by a tenacious and
profound passion, the passion for an absolute and for truth. The truth is yet a negative one, a
truth born of living and feeling, but without which no triumph over the self or over the world
will ever be possible83.

Sarmad too stood for Truth and paid, for it by sacrificing his life. To
Bertrand Russell, 'Truth is a rather grim and vengeful deity'. He wrote:
 Truth is a stern and pitiless God; he exerts his hecatombs of human sacrifices, he slays with
jealous thunder every love which is unfaithful to him, he drives into madness those who cannot
bear the full terror of his majestic frown, in his service is courage, in his service only can the
soul grow great, in his service only the shining lights are kindled and the mountain tops by
which, far off in the plain, humanity is guided in the night of fear and perplexity84.

It is, I think, not an accident that Azad lies buried close to Sarmad's
grave facing the Jama Masjid, near Delhi's Red Fort and Chandni Chowk,
the symbols of India's historic cultural past. Azad may have expressed his
wish to be buried near the Sufi on whom he wrote an essay, and whose
thoughts and ideas were to nourish and sustain his own religious and
political life subsequently.
 NOTES
1. V.N. Datta, Maulana Azad. New Delhi 1990; p.50.
2. Due to the scarcity of contemporary source-material it is a
challenging task for a writer to produce a full-scale Sarmad's
biography. It is creditable indeed that Radha Swami Satsang, Beas,
has brought out three biographies of Sarmad. The first biography
written by Isaac A. Ezekiel appeared in 1966, and the second revised
edition of the work was published in 2005. Both these studies focus
on Sarmad as a sufi, and give little account of his early life and
execution. The second revised edition interprets the sources and
studies on Sarmad, and contains a select bibliography. The author of
both these books, Isaac A. Ezekiel, a well-known journalist closely
associated with B.G. Horniman, was formerly the director of
Publicity and Recruitment in the Government of India, and a disciple
of Maharaj Sawa Singh of Beas. Ezekiel has reconstructed Sarmad's
life and beliefs by analysing Sarmad's Ruba'iyat on Sufism. A major
portion of both these works deals with the religious ideas of Sarmad
and of other Indian mystics, philosophers and thinkers. In 1990
Radha Swami Satsang brought out in Urdu a short biography of
Sarmad which was written in Punjabi by Jeet Singh Seetle. This
work like the two above-mentioned studies focuses on Sarmad's
religious beliefs and ideals.
Relying on Azad's essay on Sarmad, Walter Hansen mixes history
with fiction and romanticises Sarmad's execution. See chapter 24 in
Walter Hansen, The Peacock Throne, The Drama of Mogol India,
London, 1973.
Based on the Persian sources including Mubid Shah's contemporary
account Dabistan-i Madhahib, in his article 'A Sketch of the life of
Sarmad', Maulvi Abdul Wali gives a fair appraisal of Sarmad's
 religious beliefs and his conflict with Aurangzeb. See Maulvi Abdul
Wali, 'A Sketch of the Life of Sarmad' in 'Journal' of the Asiatic
Society of Bengal Calcutta, vol.XX.1924, 111-124.
The only reliable account of the early Indian years of Sarmad is to be
found in Dabistan-i Madhahib by Mubid Shah, a contemporary of
Sarmad. Mubid Shah had met Sarmad at Haidarabad (Deccan) in
1647, and his chapter on Judaism is based on the information he had
gathered from Sarmad. See Mubid Shah, Dabistan-i-Madhahib (Urdu
translation) by Kaikhusro Afsand Yar, in 'Tughliyat' by Rashid
Ahmad Jullunduri, Lahore, 2002.
This writer has used in this study the Urdu text of Maulana Azad's
essay on Sufi Sarmad Shahid edited by Khwaja Mohammad Ahmad
(general editor) with a foreword by Mir Akbar Ali Khan, a former
governor of U.P. and Orissa, and published by Abul Kalam Azad,
Oriental Research Institute of Sufism, Hyderabad 1986. For Sarmad's
Ruba'iyat, see Ruba'iyat-i Sarmad Shahid, Farsi main tarjuma-i
Urdu o maqadama; Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Mehroom, Delhi
1963. Dr. Syeda Saiyidain Hameed has captured the meaning and
spirit of Sarmad's quatrains. Fifty out of 334 Sarmad's Ruba'iyat are
included in her collection on themes like God, love, desire,
renunciation, and death. See The Ruba'iyat of Sarmad, translated into
English by Dr. Syeda Saiyidain Hameed, I.C.H.R., New Delhi 1991.
For Sarmad's Ruba'iyat, see also Rakshat Puri, 'The Naked Faqir' in
IIC Quarterly 1993, Monsoon Quarterly, pp.65-77.
3. Ahmad, Malikzada Manzur, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Fakr-o-Fun
(Urdu), Lucknow 1978, pp.109-119.
4. Ian Henderson Douglas, Abul Kalam Azad, an intellectual and
religious biography, edit, Gail Minnault and C.W. Troll, New Delhi
1988.
5. Ahmad, op. cit.
6. Douglas, op. cit.
7. Chapter 10, Christian W. Troll 'Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, The
Martyr' in Christopher Shackle (Urdu and Muslim Asian Studies) in
honour of Ralph Russell, London, 1989.
8. C.W. Troll, A paper presented on 'Abul Kalam Azad and Sarmad, The
Martyr' at International Conference held at Jamia Millia Islamia,
 New Delhi in December 1992. Later a revised version of this essay
was published in Islam and Indian Nationalism: Reflections on Abul
Kalam Azad, edit. Mushirul Hasan, New Delhi 1992,28-42.
9. Douglas, op.cit. 288.
10. Mushirul Hasan; 32-42.
11. Ibid; 32, 35 and 40.
12. Ibid; 29.
13. Ibid; p30, 35 and 38.
14. Tazkira, Rev. ed. Malik Ram, New Delhi 1968, 317-20, 329-30.
15. Puri, op.cit, 65; see Ahmad, 11
16. Ahmad, 11.
17. Puri, 69.
18. Sir Jadunath Sarkar, The History of Aurangzeb, vol.Ill, 95, see the
same author, A Short History of Aurangzeb, 100.
19. Where unquoted I have translated the Persian Ruba'iyat. See Ahmad,
15 and Hameed, 35. Walderman Hansen doubts whether sensual
passions played any part in their love (40); Puri doubts about their
homosexual relationship. 69.
20. Ahmad, 14. Sarmad's following verse shows his attachment with
Abhai Chand.
Na mi danam darin charkhey kuhan dair
Fiday-ye man abhi chand ast ya ghair
I know not if in this spherical old monastry (world) My God is Abhai
Chand or someone else
See, 'Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal', article by Wali Abdul, no.
11, p.112, op.cit. It appears from Dabistan-i-Madhahib that Sarmad
retained his deep attachment with Abhai Chand. He took him to
Hyderabad and later to Delhi. Abhai Chand too followed Sarmad in
composing his poetry and adopting his syncretic ideas of religion and
spirituality, Abhai Chand wrote:
Ham matih-i farkanam ham kasheyso rahbanim
Rabbi yahudanim kafiram mussulmanim
 I am at once a follower of the Furqan, a priest, a monk. A Jewish
Rabhi, an infidel and Mussulman. See Mubid Shah, 246; see also
Wali, 113.
21. Ahmad Khwaja Mohammad; 16.
22. Ibid; 18.
23. Ibid; 17. At Sinai Moses (fourteenth and thirteenth century BC) who
had delivered his people from Egyptian slavery apprehended the
vision of God in a terrific storm, which was a revelatory experience.
Moses had wanted God to reveal himself but God said 'Thou shall
not see me, but look at the Mountain which is strong.' Moses looked
at the mountain and there appeared God's light and he fell into a
swoon.
24. Ahmad, 18.
25. Ibid; 19.
26. Ibid; 22.
27. Walter De La Mare, love, London MCMXIVIII, 85
28. Ahmad, 21.
29. For Dara Shikoh's character and learning, see Ahmad, 20-21. For a
scholarly study of Dara Shikoh's life and literary contributions, see
Bikrama Jit Hasrat, Dara Shikoh: Life and Works, New Delhi, 1982.
30. Ahmad; 20.
31. Ibid; 20-21. Dara belonged to the Qadiriyah Sufi order. His Majmaul
Bahrain is a compilation of the correspondence exchanged between
Hindu and Muslim cosmographers. He had translated the Yog-
Vashist, Bhagavada-Gita and the Upanishads into Persian.
32. Niccolao Manucci, Storia do Migor, ed. William Irvine, vol.1, New
Delhi 1981, 214.
33. Ahmad, 21.
34. Ibid;
35. Ibid;
36. Ibid; and Troll in Islam and Indian Nationalism ed. Hasan, 20-21.
37. Ahmad, 21, Troll in Islam and Indian Nationalism, 37
38. Ahmad, 23, Troll, op.cit. 38
39. Ahmad; 22
40. Ibid; 22-23
41. Ibid; 22. Maulvi Abid Wali Shah points out that according to Sufis
who believe in tawhid (Unity of God), there is nothing objectionable
in the view that Sarmad took. Some 'ulema think that the Miraj or
the nocturnal journey of the Prophet was allegorical or spiritual. See
Wali, op.cit. p.114.
42. Ibid.
43. Ibid; Francois Bernier, the contemporary of Sarmad, writes that it
was due to Sarmad's 'obstinate refusal to put on wearing apparel' that
Aurangzeb inflicted on him the punishment of decapitation; see
Bernier, Travels in the Mughal Empire (1656-1668); edit Archibald
Constable, New Delhi, 1972, 317. Sarmad used to say that among
the Israelites the custom of covering the private parts of the body
was not compulsory, and that in his last days the Prophet, Isaihah
himself had to go naked. See Wali, 112-113. See also Hansen, 402.
44. Ahmad, 23. Hansen described Sarmad as a 'Mystical King of Faqirs,
who proved an open threat to the reign of the tyrant'. See Hansen,
395.
45. Ibid; 23-24.
46. Ibid; 24.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid; 25.
50. Ibid.
51. Ibid. About religious faith, Ludwig Wittgenstein made an interesting
observation. He wrote: 'If you and I are to live religious lives, it must
not be that we talk a lot about religion.'
52. Ibid; 26.
53. Ibid; 25. For Mansur's execution, see Reynold A Nicholson,
Orientalism in Early Sources: The Mijstics of Islam, vol.VIII,
London, 1963, 200, 148-150; see also The Legacy of Islam, ed. by
late Joseph Sachacht with C.E. Bosworth, Oxford, 1974, 371. See
also Dr. Tara Chand, Influence of Islam on Indian Culture,
Allahabad, 1955, 44.
54. Ahmad, 25.
55. Ibid; 26.
56. Ibid. Ahmad; 26. See journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 116. The
second line is quoted as exhibit with my head the gallows and cord.
57. Ahmad; 27-28.
58.. Ibid;27.
59. Ibid; 27-28.
60. Ibid; 28.
61. Ibid.
62. Ibid.
63. Ibid.
64. Ibid; 29.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid.
67. Ibid.
68. An Arabic book al-Lulu Wal-marjan vol.1, edit. Muhammad Faud al
Baqi, 17-18, see also SAHIH—Al-Bukhari, The Translation of the
Meanings of SAHIH-AL, Bukhari, (Arabic) in English translation, ed.
Dr. Muhammad Mohsin Khan, vol.1, 25-26, New Delhi.
69. Mazahir-i-Haqq Jadid, (translated in Urdu) Mush Kwat Sharif,
vol.1, Allama Nawab Mohd. Qutb-ud-Din, Delhvi Key Ifadat-i
'Mazhar Haqq' compiled by Abdulla Javid Ghazipur, Deoband, 66-
67.
70. Aurobindo Ghosh, The Life Divine, Pondicherry, 1966, 35-36.
71. Ibid; p.36.
72. Bertrand Russell, Mysticism and Logic, London, 1953, 32-33, see
Ray Monk, Bertrand Russell, The Spirit of Solitude, London, 1996,
314.
73. Hasrat, Jit, 8-9, 51, 103, 207-208.
74. Ibid; 103. In his Majma ul-Bahrain (the mingling of the two
oceans), Dara Shikoh had tried to reconcile the doctrine of Brahma
Vidya and the tenets of the Quran. See Hasrat, 13 and 221. Because
of Dara Shikoh's interest in Hindu scriptures, his propagation of the
Ideal of Sulh-i kul (peace with all) and his admiration for Hindu
philosophy, Aurangzeb's legal advisors condemned him for apostacy.
Sir Jadunath Sarkar thinks that it was his Majma ul-Bahrain which
brought about Dara Shikoh's end. See Hasrat, p. 221.
75. Professor Mohammad Mujeeb, Khana ]ungi, Jamia Millia Islamia,
New Delhi, pp. 1-76. See Faruqi Ziaul Hasan, Maulana Abdul Kalam
Azad (Urdu) in Islam and Asr-e Jadid edited Akhtarul Wasey, New
Delhi, Jild, 33, Jan-0ct.2001, no.3, 4, p.96.
76. Puri, p. 65.
77. Ahmad, p. 29.
78. Wali, Journal of Asiatic Society, Bengal, p. 119.
79. Troll cited in Hasan, p. 30.
80. Ibid; 30, see Ahmad, p. 8.
81. Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, vol.111, edit. David Womerslay, London, 1994, pp. 227. For
the poet Iqbals' moving account of Karbala event, see 'Hadisa-i-
Karbala' in Almi Sahara, New Delhi, 1 Feb., 2006, pp. 18-19. See
also Sarwat Saulat, Millat Islamia ki Mukhtsar Tawarikh, vol.1, New
Delhi, 2001, pp. 135-139.
82. J.S. Grewal, 'Martyrdom in Sikh Studies' Quarterly, Amritsar, July-
Sept.2000 issue, pp. 10-20; J.P.S. Uberoi too considers martyrdom an
integral part of Sikhism, see J.P.S. Uberoi Religion, Civil Society and
the State: A Study of Sikhism, New Delhi, pp. 112-123. For the
martyrdom of Guru Arjun, see Dr. Ganda Singh The Punjab Past
and Present, Patiala; vol.XIl. 1 April 1978, pp. 160-70.
83. Albert Camus, The Outsider, London, 1982, p.119.
84. Monk, p. 160.
 SARMAD'S RUBATYAT

t is not possible to know much about Sarmad's life due to the scarcity of
source-material. It is from his ruba'is that some idea of Sarmad's religious
beliefs can be formed. There is little of his personal life in these ruba'is but
they do provide a fair insight into the working of his mind, and the ideas he
had cherished and lived for.
Sarmad acknowledges that in the composition of his ruba'is he owed
much to the ruba'is of Umar Khayyam and the ghazals of Hafiz. However,
he claims that both in content and style of his poetry he followed none, but
adopted his own mode. Sarmad's ruba'is express his experiences of a
passionate and confirmed Sufi who wrestles with himself and the world for
the attainment of Divine bliss.
The ruba'is make it clear that Sarmad was not a scholar of a library. He
disdained to turn to the mullahs for advice. He stood on his own. Whatever
he learnt, thought and wrote, be derived from his observations and
meditations. Sarmad's poetry shows how earnestly he was involved in
leading the life of a Sufi. He longed desperately for the vision of God, and
his poetry gives a clear message, and his message is to seek a union with
God and be one with Him. The tone of his poetry is moral. His poetry
shows how a Sufi has to pass through various stages to reach successively
higher stages of being. There may be many slips on the way—one may
falter and stumble; but the journey has to be completed, and the task
accomplished—there is no cause for despair. In his characteristic manner
Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa expressed a similar idea when he said: 'when
the young calf is born, its legs wobble. When it tries to stand it falls, stands
up and falls again until its legs get stronger'.
 Sarmad insists that for apprehending the reality of God the first step is
to plunge into self-purification by discarding worldly pursuits and amorous
passions. To cleanse the human mind is to realise the pure nature of the
human being, called the atman (soul). He thinks that desires ought not be
extinguished but be directed to realise the Divine Truth. Desire is not in
itself wrong but all desires must be worked out and fulfilled before
communion at the highest level is apprehended. Sarmad wants to preserve
the independence of his solitude so that he can cultivate his own garden.
According to Sarmad, solitude is necessary for self-examination and
introspection so that human frailties such as greed, anger, lust, selfishness
and complacency can be eliminated from one's own self.
To Sarmad in matters spiritual, rationality has no claim to be a decisive
factor, though in worldly questions it has an important role to play. It is not
rationality but intution and inner experience that are the instruments for the
realisation of spiritual truth. That is why, Sarmad says, 'Khud ra dar janoon'
(plunge yourself in estatic hypnosis). His goal is to advance from the
outward to the inward, from multiplicity to tawhid (unity).
According to Sarmad a Sufi has to temper himself so well that he
should feel neither elated by worlds' praise nor depressed by its neglect. He
has to maintain the integrity of his character, the independence of his
thought, and the dignity of his carriage. A Sufi needs no crutches—he has
to stand and rely on himself. To Sarmad, the religion of a Sufi is love, the
animating and dynamic power of life which turns towards the Divine. In
fact, all love is Divine which awakens the reality of being and brings
knowledge, higher peace and harmony. The true love of the Divine is
complete submission and surrender to God, or what Dante called La sua
voluntate e notra pace (His will is our Peace).
In his ruba'is Sarmad, the poet is bound with the reformer. Sarmad says,
'Hold to God' and the rest will take care of itself. Sarmad's life exemplifies
free mysticism and anarchic individualism. He follows the ideals of moral
pantheism, seeing God in all, and all in God. While Muslim thinkers like
Sir Muhammad Iqbal stood for Islamic nationalism, Sarmad like other
renowned Sufis and enlightened individuals such as Akbar and his great-
grandson Dara Shikoh advocated the humanism of historical Islam. Sarmad
had the vision of universal man and universality of outlook which is evident
in the following ruba'i—the last one in his poetical collection, for which an
orthodox Muslim cleric would have condemned him as a kafir.
Sarmad bajah basey niko nam shudi
Az mazhabay kufr suay Islam shudi
Akhir chey khata didi za Allah o Rasul
Bargasht-i-muridey-i-Lakshmana o Ram shudi
Sarmad became famous the world over
From apostacy he turned to Islam
What fault he saw in God or Mohammad
That he became a disciple of Lakshmana o Ram. I
Sarmad's poetry strikes a didactic note. His purpose was ethical. In his
poetic craft he lacked the range and depth of Jalalud Din Rumi and Hafiz's
width of experience, polish and inspiring power of music. He has none of
Umar Khyyam's visual imagery and subtle melancholy. In Sarmad's poetry
there is a persistent note of sobriety of thought, and at places he is lucid in
his expression. In his poetry he draws heavily from the classical Persian
poetry using images such as wine, cup, tavern, garden, nightingale, cage
and desert, etc. Devoid of technical virtuousity of an artist, his ruba'is are
generally contrived and artificial but certainly meaningful and instructive.
 NOTES
1. Ruba'iyat-i-Sarmad Shahid (Persian) muqadama Maulana Abul
Kalam Azad Merhoom, Delhi, 1963, p.105
 GLOSSARY

Dervis : a mendicant.
Faqir : contended in minimal goods for pleasure of Allah to
remain poor in the sight of God, rather than in need of
worldly possessions.
Fatwa : a decree from the canonists.
Furqan : the arbiter that makes a distinction between truth and
falsehood, named the Quran.
Hajj : the pilgrimage performed in the
twelfth month of the Islamic
calender.
Haq : Truth.
Iblis : Satan, a representative of evil, one who had refused to
bow down to Adam, when angels were commanded to
do so by God, and he was cast out of heaven for his
disobedience.
Imam : a leader of congregational prayers.
Kabba : the cubicle building in the centre of the mosque at
Mecca.
Kalima : the creed of the Muslims. La illaha ilia allaha—There
is no God except Allah.
Khana Jungi : civil war.
Kufr : : infidelity, unbelief.
Miraj : Muhammad's supposed journey to heaven or the
nocturnal journey ascension to the highest point
nearest to God.
Mullah : a learned man, a scholar.
Pir : a religious leader or guide.
Ramadhan : the ninth month of the Islamic calender while fast is
observed, starting from dawn to sunset of each day in
the month.
Ruba'iyat : quatrains.
Sufi : one who professes the mystic principals of Tasawwuf.
Takhulluss : non de plume.
Tawhid : Unity of God.
Sharia't : the law including the teachings of the Quran and the
Hadith.
'ulema : the learned scholars in Islamic law.
Wahdat-e Adyaan : the oneness of religions, which Maulana Azad
regarded as the fundamental message of Islam.
Wahdat al-Wajud : the philosophy which allows no distinction between
the existence of God and that of the world, meaning
oneness of God or unity of existence; closely
associated with the philosophy followed by Sheikh
Muhiuddin Ibn al Arabi. It provides the way of
pluralistic ethics as opposed to the narrow theological
limits set by the traditional Mullahs.
Zakat : it is a tenet of Islam, a formal duty enjoined on the
Muslims to disburse a specific amount of his wealth
for the assistance of the poor, the needy and first
among the relations and then to others as outlined in
the Hadiths.