RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS DURING THE MUGHAL PERIOD

Satish Chandra has argued that both Islam and Hindu witnessed conflicting
trends of liberalism and catholicity on the one hand, and rigid exclusiveness
and conservatism, on the other, during the 16 th, 17th and 18th centuries. Thus,
the earlier movements in Sikhism, Hinduism and Islam that had come to be
characterized by a great deal of eclecticism, fluidity and unorthodoxy had
undergone a significant change during and by the end of the Mughal period.

This conflicting trend was extremely intense in case of Islam, where the strife
between shariat and tariqat (Sufism) was highly evident. Sufism is a mystic
interpretation of Islamic life within the bonds of religious orthodoxy and had
originated in Persia and other parts of Western Asia. Sufism had emerged not
as a challenge to Islam, to the Quran or to the Prophet but simply as a
movement against the formal or external attitude of the ulama. Muslim
theologians being unaware of the changing trends of time, seldom tried to
reconstruct their socio-religious thought accordingly, thereby reducing Islam
to a set of lifeless rituals and ceremonies. The Sufis stood for a direct and
natural approach to religion. Thus, while the ulama maintained the Islamic
concept of equality and brotherhood within the community, the Sufis
extended this to non-muslims as well. Their attention from the very beginning
seems to have been directed towards removing racial distinctions, class
superiority, and religious differences. The ideological base of the Sufi beliefs
was the creation of a society that believed in the essential unity of all religions
and the idea of universal brotherhood. However, there were many orders
within Sufism that did not adhere to this basic idea.

Sufism sought to achieve the inner realization of divine unity by arousing

intuitive and spiritual faculties. Rejecting rational arguments, the Sufis
advocated contemplation and meditation. They were the seekers of Tauhid-
unity of god and tried to spread Islam through this mystic movement. The
seekers of Tauhid sought to dedicate themselves to the prophet so much so
that their entire selves including their heart and spirits were free of thoughts
other than of god.
Practical spiritual discipline based on the inside of the seeker to understand
the truth and mission of high religion order, which is opposed to strife in any
form and the joy of self-realisation is the essence of religion and experienced
after a long period of spiritual practice. The concept of Sufism was to focus the
mystic power on the spiritual dimension of Islam and the purpose was to
safeguard Islam from the outwardly dogma of faith.

Sufism was introduced and popularized in India by two 11 th century Sufis,

Shaikh Ali Hujwiri of Ghazna, who settled in Lahore and Shaikh Saifuddin
Gazruni, who lived in Uchh in South Punjab. By the 12 th century, the Sufis had
organized themselves into 12 silsilas or orders, each called after a great Sufi
Shaikh to whom the followers traced their spiritual descent. It has been
argued that the real purpose of the Sufis in India was missionary i.e. to convert
people to Islam. The most prominent orders of Sufism in India were the Chisti,
Suhrawardi, Naqshbandi and Qadri. While the first two were well established
since the time of the Sultanate period, and had witnessed a decline with the
fall of the Sultanate, it was the Naqshbandi and Qadri saints that came to play
a prominent role during the Mughal period that at times seemed to
overshadow the pre-existing orders.

The impact of the Sufi philosophy on Akbar is evident from his new state
policy of “Sulh-i-kul”. The idea of universal brotherhood, essential oneness of
god and the underlying unity in all religions was among other factors inspired
by the Sufi philosophy of Wahdat-ul-Wujud. It was this philosophy of Ibn-
Arabi, which taught Akbar that either all religions are equal or all are equally
illusionary. He was also inspired by the concept of Fana or annihilation, which
essentially implied that human attributed are annihilated through union with
a god, a state in which the mystic finds an eternal life. The increasing influence
of the Sufi philosophy could also be seen during the Ibadat Khanna
discussions as the assembly soon came to be dominated by the Sufis. He was
inspired by Sufism that stated that God was formless and could n be grasped
in any form except by the greatest efforts of the mind i.e. meditation. Thus, he
rejected the idol worship of Hindus and the prayer rituals of the Muslims.
Moreover, he believed that man was responsible to god for his every act and
thus for him as an emperor the dispensing of justice and administering the
world was the real mode of worship. However, this liberal attitude professed
by certain sects of Sufism soon came to be criticized by other orders, the most
prominent and important being the Naqshbandi order. Akbar was also a great
patron of the Chishti order especially of Moinuddin Chisthi and this order
underwent a revival during this period.

The Naqshbandi order was introduced into India by Khwaja Baqi Billal, the
seventh in succession to khwaja Bahauddin Naqshbandi, the founder of the
order. The Naqshbandi saints believed in the strict adherence to the shariat
and the love for the prophet was the essence of this order. From the beginning
the mystics of this order had laid stress upon the rigid observance of law as
per the shariat and emphatically denounced any innovations that had spoiled
the purity of Islam. Thus, the rise of the Naqshbandi sect can be seen as a
reaction to the rising challenge from the concept of Wahdat-ul-Wujud and the
religious environment that had been created in the reign of Akbar.

The Naqshbandi saints believed that since the rulers of the day had a deep
impact on the lives of the people, it was necessary to establish contact with
them and influence their thoughts and actions. It is for this reason that unlike
any other mystic order of Islam, these mystics alone considered it not only
permissible but imperative to establish direct contact with the rulers and play
a crucial role in politics. For nearly two centuries, the Naqshbandi Silsila was
the prinicipal spiritual order in India and its influence permeated far and deep
in Indo-Muslim life. Just as the rise and fall of the Chishti silsila is closely
linked to the history of the Delhi Sultanate, similarly the history of the
Naqshbandi order is linked to that of the Mughal Empire so much so that no
analysis of the change in the religious attitudes of the rulers from the time of
Akbar to Aurangzeb is possible without analyzing the role of the Maqshbandi
mystics.

S.A.A. Rizvi has argued that the Naqshbandi influence on the Mughals can be
traced back to their ancestral roots as all the central Asian and Transoxian
towns were strongholds of the silsilah. Thus, from the time of Timur there was
an unbroken tradition of respect, devotion and attachment to this order
within the family. Such reverence could be seen during the time of Babur and
Humayun as well and was naturally going to continue during the reign of their
descendants as well.

A new phase in the history of the Naqshbandi silsilah seems to have stated
with the arrival of Khwaja Baqi Billah in India from Kabul. He played a major
role in expanding the influence of this order in India but the Shaikh carried on
his work of religious and moral reform without getting involved in politics in
anyway. It was only with the entry of Shaikh Ahmad of Sirhind into his fold
that the atmosphere changed and the palace also came within the orbit of
Naqshbandi activity.

Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi was an uncompromising monotheist, who did not

agree with the religious experiments of Akbar as they had elements that ran
counter to the orthodox Islamic concept of monotheism. The source of
Sirhindi’s criticism against Akbar wasn’t the liberal and inclusive environment
that the Emperor sought and had succeeded in creating. It was when Akbar
crossed the threshold of normal human behavior in the religious sphere and
assumed the religious leadership of the people he became a focal point of
many controversies. He believed that God, who had created the world could
not be identified with his creatures. He argued that Muslims should follow
their religion and Hindus should follow their religious ways but he was not
willing to accept this new situation of no religion that was slowly emerging in
India.

However, some scholars like Satish Chandra have pointed out that Sirhindi
was an active opponent of the concept of Wahdat-ul-Wujud and tried to purge
from Islam all practices and beliefs, which he considered to be un-Islamic
including practices and ceremonies that were derived from Hinduism,
listening to religious music and advocated no social intercourse with the
Hindus. He was a bitter critic of the appeasement shown by Akbar towards the
non-muslims and was adamant about the reimposition of the jizyah and the
resumption of cow slaughter. He also denounced the shias and the worldly
ulema and Sufis, whom he held responsible for the emperor’s departure from
Sunni orthodoxy. Irfan Habib has argued that Shaikh Ahmad wanted to
imprison the mind in the narrowest theological vision and poured abuse upon
everything he did not understand or could fit into the Shariat. This has been
agreed upon to a certain extent by Rizvi, who states that Sirhindi considered
himself to be the renewer of the first millennium of Islam and had been sent
by God to restore Sunni Orthodoxy to its pristine purity.

Sirhindi was in favour of progression and reasoning as long as it was within

the framework of the Quran and the Sunnah. He was, however, opposed to
deviation from this as being interpreted as Ijtihad or something based on
reasoning. He argued that Ijtihad was not a departure from the Sunnah but its
application to new problems and situations. The new tendencies under Akbar,
according to him, were dissuading people from looking at the prophet as the
source of all religious guidance and inspiration- something that was not at all
acceptable to him as he believed that only those who followed the prophet,
followed God.

He believed that since the court was the center for all such experiments it was
necessary to bring it under his direct control and bring about a change in its
atmosphere. He wrote letters to some of the leading nobles of the time trying
to influence their ideological leanings. It is clear that towards the end of
Akbar’s reign a deep wedge had been created between Akbar and his nobles
and this was something that was attested by Jahangir as well in his biography.
It is because of this alleged role of Sirhindi in creating a wedge between Akbar
and his nobles that many scholars believe that he played a dominant role in
Mughal politics in the post-Akbar era.

Rizvi states that Sirhindi welcomed the accession of Jahangir hoping that a
new emperor would mean a new era for Islam in India, thereby, preserving
the fabric of the Islamic society that had been shattered by Akbar. The fact
that Jahangir received support from such important mystics was reciprocated
by a number of commitments made by the emperor. The Jesuit accounts
highlight Jahangir’s commitment to uphold Islamic principles in return for
their support and this has been mentioned in the letters written by Sirhindi
and other mystics as well to Jahangir. This shows that he did infact play an
important role in the accession of Jahangir to the throne. However, it is
important to note that for 14 years after his accession there was no significant
development in Sirhindi’s relationship with the Emperor. However, his
influence went on increasing during this period and his khalifas operated in
every town and city during this period. In the 14 th regnal year, however,
Sirhindi was imprisoned for about a year. Although the reasons motivating
such a move are not very clear, Rizvi states that it was an outcome of internal
court politics instigated by Nur Jahan, which led to his imprisonment.

There is a great deal of debate regarding the influence of Sirhindi on Jahangir

following his release from prison. A number of his followers state that he
began to wield greater and more direct influence over the Emperor following
his release from prison. His letters also suggest that he began to have long
audiences with the Emperor in which he explained the Quranic verses and the
basic ideas of Islam. He put forth his viewpoints quite boldly and believes that
Emperor showed no signs of disapproval or displeasure.

However, this has been questioned in recent years by modern scholars. Rizvi
believes that there is no direct evidence to suggest that Jahangir was under
the influence of Sirhindi even if he was tolerant enough to listen to his views.
The main reason for this according to Rizvi was because of the presence of
other influences at his court especially that of Nurjahan, which seems to have
completely negated the impact of the Naqshbandi saint. However, he does
admit that Jahangir had abandoned Akbar’s policy of dabbling in religious
matters and making religious experiments. Rizvi goes on to say that one
cannot ignore the fact that there was a significant change in the attitude of the
Mughal rulers in the religious sphere. The religious cosmopolitanism of Akbar
was abandoned; the religious indifference of Jahangir was given up by
Shahjahan and Aurangzeb introduced his orthodox religious views into
politics. Rizvi believes that Aurangzeb’s orthodoxy was shaped by the
influence that the Naqshbandi saints had on him. In particular Aurnagzeb had
developed close ties with the son of Sirhindi, Khwaja Muhammad Ma’sum. It
appears from the letters exchanged between the two that Aurangzeb had
adopted the Naqshbandi discipline in toto and observed many of the practices
prescribed by the silsilah. This legacy of Sirhindi, according to Rizvi, had a
deep impact on the fortunes of the Mughal Empire as such views found
expression in the political activities as well.
Rizvi states that despite the statements and agitations of Sirhindi it would be
wrong to dismiss his movement as narrow and sectarian. His opposition was
focused on Akbar’s desire to become the religious leader, his religious
experiments and the atmosphere it had created at court. As soon as this
atmosphere disappeared, his attitude underwent a significant change. In
letters written subsequent to Akbar’s reign one does not find the same sort of
bitterness or criticism. Thus, Rizvi believes that Sirhindi’s antagonism was not
against Akbar’s attempt at secularizing the state but against his interference in
religious matters and his attempts to assume religious leadership. This is also
evident from the fact that Sirhindi appreciated Jahangir’s reign as there was
no open hostility against the Prophet, which was evident during Akbar’s reign.
This clearly indicates the real purpose of his movement. A western scholar,
Yohanan Freedman, argued that there is no evidence to show that Sirhindi or
his disciples indulged in anti-Hindu movements. He was primarily a Sufi
interested in the questions of mysticism.

However, as seen above some scholars like Satish Chandra believe that
Sirhindi was motivated by his hatred for all non-muslims and did not want to
see any form of equality with them. This has been supported by Habib as well,
who believes that he was motivated more than just his desire to protect and
preserve the purity of Islamic beliefs. Sirhindi had a definite view of how the
Hindus should be treated and believed that the glory of Islam lay in
humiliation of infidelity and the infidels. He argued that holding non-muslims
in esteem, which included having a normal conversation with them also meant
a disgrace for Islam. Thus, Habib argues that it is a little difficulty to believe
that Sirhindi’s movement was meant only to protect Islam from the
persecution that had apparently been launched by Akbar.

Irrespective of the motives of Sirhindi, it is interesting to note that most of the

modern scholars believe that Sirhindi had been unable to change the cultural
ethos that had been created during the time of Akbar. While, Rizvi believed
that Sirhindi had been instrumental in shaping the religious beliefs of even
Aurangzeb, this has been strongly questioned by Satish Chandra and Habib.
The former points out the Sirhindi himself fell foul to the orthodox elements
whom he had denounced. They argued that he claimed a status equal to the
prophet and therefore tried to topple him. It is for this reason that he was
imprisoned. Moreover, both Shahjahan and Aurangzeb did not pay any heed
to his sons. Infact, in 1682-83, the sheriff of Mecca wrote to Aurangzeb that
the ulama over there believed that Shaikh Ahmad was an infidel because of
which the Emperor was forced to ban his teachings in the Empire. Moreover,
Chandra states while theological studies surged ahead in the reign of
Aurangzeb, it would be wrong to think that the concept of Wahdat-ul-Wujud
underwent a serious decline during this period. Both the liberal and orthodox
trends continued in Sufism and the Chishti order also underwent a
resurgence. Many people joined more than one order, thereby, ensuring a
great deal of eclecticism.

Irfan Habib has also argued that the belief popular among western scholars
that long before British rule, the consensus of the Muslim community in India
had rejected the eclecticism of Akbar and Dara for the purified Islamic
teachings of Shaikh Ahmad is a complete myth. According to him, Sirhindi was
not a leader of the masses. He focused only on the King and his nobles as he
felt that they alone could reverse the existing trend. Thus, his appeal was
never to Muslims in general but only the men in authority. Habib has also
questioned the influence that Sirhindi had over o during Jahangir’s reign. The
belief that he was close to Shaikh Farid and thus could influence Jahangir
through him is based on false assumptions. Farid was a high ranking official,
who was extremely loyal to Akbar and thus would not have tolerated the
intense criticism against him. Moreover, Farid himself was not one of the
intimate advisors of Jahangir as some scholars like to suggest. The belief that
Jahangir had made commitments to uphold Islam at the time of his accession
has also been attacked. Habib argues that Jahangir made no commitments to
orthodox Islam are in fact over whelming. For instance, he praised the liberal
attitude of Akbar, stressed his respect for the sun and upheld the ban on the
slaughter of cows. Sirhindi himself wrote in his letters that his jubilation over
Jahangir’s commitment to Islam was extremely premature. Similarly, he
believes that the influence of Sirhindi over Jahangir following his release from
prison is just a legend created and popularized by his followers and no new
trends in religious policy had started. The slaughter of cows at the Kangra fort,
which was held as a symbol of this new influence was nothing more than a
political act of victory. Finally, Habib has stated that Sirhindi had never
supported Shahjahan himself as he had denounced his rebellion and that there
were only fleeting references to his sons during the reign of Aurangzeb. Thus,
his legacy could not have been as strong as it is made out to be.

The Qadiriyya order was popularized by Shaikh Abdul Qadir. As a contrast to

the Naqshbandi order they were strong supporters of the idea of Wahdat-ul-
Wujud. A leading mystic in the 17 th century was Mullah Shah Badakhshani,
who dismissed the attempts of the orthodox elements to paint the Hnidus in
the negative light. He declared that the infidels, who had perceived the reality
and recognized it was a true believer, and a believer, who did not recognize
reality was an infidel. Satish Chandra argues that while this order is
considered to be liberal and the NAqshbandi silsilah is believed to be
orthodox there was no definite distinction between the two on this ground.
For instance, Shaikh Abdul Haqq despite belonging to this sect was orthodox
by nature, while, Mirza Mazhar Jan-i-Jahan belonging to the Naqshbandi order
came to the conclusion that the Vedas were actually the revealed books.

Thus, it can be seen that the liberal trends of Sufism had undergone a
significant change during the Mughal period. It was the influence of its secular
and liberal tenets that had brought about a significant change in the religious
environment of India during the reign of Akbar. This was opposed not only by
the orthodox Sunni muslims but by certain sects within the existing Sufi fold
as well. The most prominent among them were the Naqshbandi sufis, who
believed in upholding and administering laws according to the shariat.
However, it would be wrong to assume that they, through their political
activism and influence were able to completely subvert the liberal tendencies
started by Akbar or promote a spirit of orthodoxy in Mughal India.

The concept of Bhakti was defined and analyzed in different ways and under
various shades of opinion at many stages. Shankara, a South Indian Shaivite
Brahman, gave the doctrine of Advaita (allowing no second, i.e., monism) and
assiduously preached Upanishad doctrine of salvation through Knowledge.
Ramanuja, another South Indian Brahman, though a monist did not accept that
God may be exempt from form and qualities. Salvation could be attained
through complete devotion( Bhakti) to one supreme reality. Yoga was the best
mystical training. Mutual relationship between the devotee and God was that
of a fragment of the totality. Prapti (attainment) was the second means of
salvation. Ramanuja's God was a personal Being. He argued that as people
need God, God too needs people. The individual soul created by God out of his
own essence, returns to its maker and lives with Him forever, but it is always
distinct. It was one with God, and yet separate. This system of Ramanuja is
called visistadvaita (qualified monism).

The movement had originally started in South India, where it was dominated
by two groups- Naynars, who were devoted to God and the Alwars, who were
devoted to Vishnu. The movement began spreading to North India only during
the late medieval period, where there was no such clear cut grouping between
shaivites and vaishnavites. In North India, the movement was centered
around Ram and Krishna. This, however, did not mean that the cult of Shiva
went into decline and the Bhakti movement coexisted with a large number of
other movements in Hinduism. Between the 14 th and 17th century, the Bhakti
movement spread through North India initiated by a group of saints like
Chaitanya, Tulsidas, Tukaram, Mirabai, etc. All these saints advocated that
people should caste aside the heavy burden of caste and rituals.

The most important movement in the religious history of Medieval India was
the creation of a new sect by Ramananda (c. 1360-1470), a disciple of
Ramanuja. He renounced the rigidity of the Hindu ritual and his disciples took
the name of Advadhuta (the detached) and regarded themselves free from all
sorts of religious and social customs. But he was not prepared to go very far
from the past. That is why in his Anand Bhashya he did not recognize the right
of a Sudra to read the Vedas. One, therefore, should not expect social equality
from Ramananda.

Ramananda's teachings produced two distinct schools of thought among the

Hindus: Saguna and Nirguna To the first belonged the noted Tulsidas who
gave literary form to the religious Bhakti. In worshipping Rama as the
personal incarnation of the Supreme God, this school raised the popularity of
Rama, besides preserving the authority of the Vedas. It is interesting to note at
this point that while, Tulsidas was keen to uphold the duties prescribed by the
scriptures, he was also willing to make a compromise. He postulated salvation
for the lowliest if he constantly repeated the name of Rama, and accorded him
a status equal to the Brahmans. At the same time, Tulsi regretted the attempts
of the Shudras to usurp the privileges of the Brahmans, and to set themselves
up as teachers. He defended the caste system but postulated a caste system
based on individual merit rather than birth.

Another school was represented by Kabir who preached a religious system

strictly monotheistic advocating abolition of Varnaashrama, and casting doubt
on the authority of the Vedas and other sacred books. The school of Kabir
sought to understand Islam and was sufficiently broad minded to incorporate
some of its basic principles. That is why his references are available in the Sufi
literature as well. Kabir did not identify himself with any of the existing
systems of religious beliefs or practices. He was highly critical of the
representative of Islam and ‘Hinduism’: their scriptures, their beliefs and their
practices. He believed that all these practices were false and served no
purpose. In his view there could only be one way to liberation and that was his
own path: complete dedication to God alone, which he identified as personal
devotion to Rama. But this did not mean any strict adherence to Hinduism as
for him the central focus was on God, who could be called anything.

On the authority of the Bijak, the authoritative account of Kabir's philosophy,

it may be said that he never thought of founding a religion as happened after
his death. The development of the Kabirpanth took place only in the 17 th
century, and developed thereafter into various branches. The popularity of the
panth seems to have been confined to UP, Bihar, central India and to some
extent to Gujarat. With the establishment of such a large number of
Kabirpanthi centers and maths in large parts of the country, the followers of
the sect increased and numbers rose to the hundreds of thousands. Most of
these members of the panths came from the lower classes like oilmen,
weavers, washermen, cobblers etc.
However, it should be important to note that it was during this period that the
religious ideas expressed by Kabir were given a different shape and certain
rules and regulations were formulated that went against the religious beliefs
of Kabir. For instance, while, Kabir was completely against the concept of
rituals the panthis had adopted a number of rituals like fasting, reciting
mantras and wearing a tika to represent the God that they worshipped. The
concept of idol-worship also seems to have gained currency with the
beginning of the Kabirpanths. Apart from idols of Ram, SIta and Lakshman
even the images of Kabir and his wooden sandals are worshipped twice a day.
Moreover, the caste distinctions that Kabir had agitated against for so long
could not be completely eradicated from the Kabirpanthis. Members of the
lower castes such as Mehtars, Doms and Dhobis, were not permitted to wear
the kanthi of the panth. Also, people belonging to different castes ate at
different places. Thus, a movement that had begun with liberalism was
absorbed in ritualism.

The teachings of Kabir had a profound impact on Dadu, who carried forward
his teachings in Rajastan. Dadu Dayal was born in a family of cotton beaters.
He is associated with the Sant movement and was clearly influenced by Kabir.

Like Kabir, Dadu did not identify himself with any of the existing systems of
religious beliefs or practices. Although a muslim, he was not influenced by any
of the beliefs and practices of Islamic orthodoxy. Similarly, he did not identify
himself with the Hindu religious beliefs or practices. It was this concept of
nipakh i.e. non-attachment to any religious order that Dadu seems to be
greatly indebted to Kabir. He forbade the practice of idol worship among his
followers and was opposed even to the prayer rituals of the muslims. He could
not see the purpose of the existing modes of worship including pilgrimages,
reading of scriptures and bathing and sacrificial rituals in the name of
appeasing God. He considered the scriptures like Vedas and the Quran to be
highly biased that were sources of conflict. Neither led to the dwelling place of
Niranjan. He believed that all these rituals like idol worship, offerings to God
and pilgrimages were superfluous in nature until and unless there was
genuine and true devotion and understanding of God. Without this one would
not be able to grasp the true significance of God nor would he be able to please
God. He argued that they offer prayers but they have no sincere faith.
Therefore, for him it was the inner feeling of devotion to God that was far
more important as compared to the formalistic and ritualistic worship that
was in vogue in the existing religions, which he rejected as being futile in
nature.

He believed that God existed within every person. Thus, for him Allah was
present within the heart; the body was the mosque, the five senses the
congregation, the heart is the mulla and imam. Thus, real worship was to take
the name of the compassionate with the whole body as the rosary. The real
fast according to him is to be devoted only to one God. The real worship
according to him could come from discarding qualities like anger and self-
realisation, showing compassion and mercy and thus, in his views the true
believer is one, who is soft-hearted, knows God and does no violence. The
right attitude towards God, who was seen as an indestructible, omnipresent,
omnipotent and transcendent all-powerful master, according to him, was that
of a slave or master. But at the same time he also acknowledges that man’s
relationship with God is not only that of bondage of slavery or service but also
of love. Another concept that was prevalent throughout his bani was that of
shabda or the word, which implied the instrument of God’s self-
communication- the voice of the eternal speaking in the heart of his devotee.

In particular, he was opposed to the existing human gurus and denounced

them vehemently. Instead he believed in the concept of Satguru i.e. God
himself was the divine teacher. According to him, all these religious Gurus
played a false and misleading role under the existing system. Thus, Dadu’s
teacher was Ram, Govind, Allah: the Divine teacher of Namdev, Kabir and all
other saints.

He was also deeply concerned about the differences that existed between the
various religions and wanted to bring the people out of their narrow
limitations of religious beliefs and practices. He argued that while one speaks
of ‘Ram’ and the other of ‘Allah’, neither understood the true meaning of either
and used such differences to cause discord and disharmony in society. They
did not realize that they were alike, as brithers, ‘the offspring of one womb’.
Dadu claimed that he belonged to neither systems and believed in the concept
of Allah-Ram. For him it was God, who was the real father, who could have
been anyone- Ram or Rahim, Keshava and Karim etc. The multiplicity of
epithets used for God underscores his Oneness: Parmeshwar, Allah,
Paramatma, Khuda, Swami, Sahib, Rahim, Brahma etc. It is impossible to read
the bani of Dadu without coming upon the Unity of God almost everywhere.

The concept of Maya figures largely in Dadu’s sayings. He argues that

beholding the power of maya, the heart grows very proud, the mind is elated
and intoxicated with the pleasures of the senses. For him, Maya was the real
enemy of the soul as it compels people to forsake the real and it is enamoured
by false beliefs. According to him, Maya makes the five senses lead the mind in
all directions, rejoice in illusion and mistake poison for nectar. Added to
sensual pleasures are the moral foibles like greed, anger and pride, which also
cause a great deal of suffering to the people. Dadu believed that all this
suffering could be overcome through the personal devotion to God.

Dadu refers to karma as much as he refers to maya. The power of deeds

(karma) is recognized; no one can escape punishment or reward if judged
strictly on the basis of their past deeds. It is for this reason that Dadu
encouraged people to cultivate moral qualities: to do away with the foul
qualities like pride, arrogance, conceit, envy etc and to practice humility and
obedience. This according to him was important to escape the cycle of births
and deaths as well or the transmigration of soul. He believed that life provides
a rare opportunity to attain liberation and this can be achieved only through
the actions of the people in their present life. However, it is important to note
that despite his attestation to the existence of chain of rebirths, which
according to him occurred on a daily basis he does not attach much
importance to the idea of transmigration. Thus, liberation for him was not
associated with transmigration but his aim was a perpetual vision of God and
absorption into the essence of God.

Dadu’s importance should also be seen in the sphere of social reforms. He

differentiated between men only on the grounds of their devotion to God or
on the basis of their piety. All human beings were equal in his eyes as they
were in the eyes of God. He was particularly critical of the caste system. He
believed that pride in birth acts as an obstacle to spiritual pursuits and
prevents people from “coming face to face with the creator”. Similarly, he
believes that it is not wrong to pursue any occupation as long as the person is
aware of the craft and in such cases the honest occupation is commendable.
His idea of equality had led him to open his order to members of all castes and
religions. As far as women were concerned he believed that the path of
liberation was open to women as well. The female devotees could pursue
spiritual life without being subordinate to men and in this way dedication to
God freed them from subjection to patriarchy. However, according to Savitiri
Chandra Shobha, Dadu shares many prejudices against women. He upholds
and reaffirms the essentially dependent role of women in society. For
instance, service to husband is considered to be an essential function of the
women. Moreover, he presents the women as symbols of maya, who present a
grave danger to the devotee of God and women are seen as the natural
enemies of man.

While Dadu did not want to associate himself with any ruler nor did he
demand any state patronage his conception of a majestic and absolute but
benevolent God-Guru at the religious level corresponds closely to Fazl’s
conception of the king at the political level. The God’s orders are to be obeyed
and devotees were willing to die for him. But at the same time, his generosity
towards his servants was unbound, he protects them and forgives their
shortcomings. Thus, unintentionally Dadu is able to preserve status quo.
However, just as he spoke about spiritual and religious unity he also
emphasized on the need for a single political authority at the wordly level and
this for him was an important pre-requisite for maintaining peace in society.

Harbans Mukhia also points out that unlike Kabir Dadu does not criticize the
functioning or role of the existing social classes. He, however, does caution the
existing ruling elites and the business classes from expanding their power
beyond a certain limit or indulging in dishonest acts. Despite his criticism of
the caste system he seems to accept the existing class structure of society and
the ideals and institutions of the ruling class (Mukhia).
The disciples and lay followers of Dadu constituted in a sense a socio-religious
group in his lifetime. A number of loosely linked centers came into existence.
Some of his leading disciples were Jan Gopal, Rajjab and Sunderdas. Although,
Dadu’s early teachings had been inspired to a certain extent by Islamic
thought, the Dadupanthis gradually began to move towards Hinduisation.
Thus, the sect turned in the direction of Hindu orthodoxy and ritualism. The
result was that following the death of Dadu, the initiation of Muslims into the
cult virtually ceased and with the emergence of Jait Sahib in 1693, the
Dadupanth turned to be an exclusive Hindu cult. Initially, the arti hymns of
Dadu were frequently recited, which were supposed to be symbolic of the
temple rituals emphasizing the inward and spiritual character of the true
worship. The symbolism of the arti hymns were gradually replaced by the
actual introduction of tangible and visible objects. The panth of Dadu became
increasingly Vaishnavized and rigorous attempts were made to approximate
the Dadupanth to the four great schools of Vaishnavism.

An important development among the Dadu-Panthis was the rise of a new

segment known as Nagas, who adopted the profession of arms. Gradually, a
fighting branch of the panth was recognized. After Jait Sahib’s death, the
military leaders became even more important. The Nagas emerged as a
distinguished category of Dadu-Panthis only in the 18 th century under the
guidance of Santokh Das. However, the importance of the Nagas reduced once
the Rajput states became subject to British paramountcy. In fact, by the end of
the 18th century, the Dadu-Panthis stood clearly differentiated into several
categories and underwent a serious decline in actual numbers. Moreover,
there was very little to distinguish between the Dadu-Panthis and the Hindu
ascetics.

The Maratha school of Vaishnavism or the Bhagavata Dharma has a long

history. By the close of the 13th century, steady enrichment and vigour was
imparted to the Bhakti movement in Maharashtra by a number of poet-saints.
The most outstanding of these was Gyaneshwara, a Brahmin who is
considered to be the greatest exponent of the Maratha Vaishnavism. He wrote
a Marathi commentary on the Bhagavadgita called Bhavartha Dipika or
Jnanesvari. The main centre of the movement started by him was Pandarpur.
The Krishna Bhakti movement of Pandarpur was intimately linked to a temple
and a deity, but it was not idolatrous in nature. The main features of the
Vaishnava religious devotion-anti-ritualism and anti-casteism in Maharashtra-
were similar to those of other non-conformist movements in the North.

The poet-saints tried to bring religion to the lowest strata of the society. The
movement in Maharashtra witnessed mass participation by different social
groups such as sudras, Atisudras, Kumbhera (potter) mali, mahar (outcaste)
and Alute balutedars. This had been possible by translating the Bhagwadgita
into Marathi. Some of the saints belonging to lower strata of society were
Harijan Saint Choka, Gora Kumbhar, Narahari Sonara, Banka Mahara, etc.

In the post-Gyaneshwar period, Namdeva (a tailor by caste), Tukaram, and

Ramdas, were important Marathi saints. Eknath (a Brahman) furthered the
tradition laid down by Gyaneshwar. Tukaram and Ramdas (Shivaji's teacher)
also raised anti-caste and anti-ritual slogans. Eknath's teachings were in
vernacular Marathi. He shifted the emphasis of Marathi literature from
spiritual text to narrative compositions. Tukaram's teachings are in the form
of verses (dohas) which constitute the Gatha. It is an important source for the
study of the Maratha Vaishnavism. His songs breathe a spirit of love and
devotion to Vitobha, an incarnate form of Vishnu at Pandharpur. The Varkari
Maratha saints developed a new method of religious instruction, i.e. Kirtan
and the Nirupana. The Maratha movement contributed to the flowering of
Marathi literature. These saints used popular dialect which paved the way for
transformation of Marathi into a literary language. The literature of the
Varkari school gives us some idea about the plebeian character of the
movement. It addressed itself to the problems of the Kunbis (farmers), Vanis
(traders) and the artisans, etc. M.G. Ranade points out that this movement led
to the development of vernacular literature and upliftment of lower castes,
etc. Despite such trends of liberalism there were strong trends of orthodoxy as
well and this orthodox section was represented by Guru Ramdas. He put
forward a philosophy of activism but was equally vehement in asserting the
privileges of Brahmins. He set up a large numbers of maths attached to
temples to propagate his ideas.
The Gaudia Vaishnav movement and the Chaitanya movement (neo-Vaishnav
movement) which derived its inspiration from the life and teachings of
Chaitanya had a tremendous impact on the social, religious and cultural life of
the people of Assam, Bengal and Orissa. The people were not only influenced
by his message but began to regard him as an incarnation of God.

The medieval Bhakti in Bengal was influenced by two streams-Vaishnav and

non-Vaishnava (Buddhism and Hinduism). Buddhism was also on the decline
and this decadent form of Buddhism influenced Vaishnavism which in turn
affected the Bengali Bhakti movement. The emphasis was on eroticism, female
form and sensuousness. It was in the midst of social and religious
conservatism and moral decadence that the Chaitanya movement dawned and
brought far-reaching changes. Chaitanya, the founder of the movement,
himself remained free from all sorts of social and religious conservatism. It
was basically not a social reform movement, though it rejected caste barriers.
Although a Brahmin, Chaitanya had no respect for the idea of the superiority
of Brahmins. He openly violated caste rules and used to mix up with the
members of the low occupational castes. He discarded the symbols of
Brahminism. The Neo-Vaishnavite movement found its adherents in such
disparate social groups-untouchables to scholars. It was the followers of
Chaitanya, who continued his teachings and ideals. Thus, the practice of
making no distinctions on the basis of caste, religion and gender continued
unabated during this period. Moreover, some sants like Madhaveda influenced
many tribal people to give up human sacrifice, and embrace Vaishnavism in
eastern India. However, according to Satish Chandra, the Goswamis of
Vrindavan, who edited and commented on Chaitanya’s work tried to add an
orthodox tinge to his thoughts.

Among some of the other lesser sants the more prominent ones were Lal Das
of the Mewat region, who was persecuted for not distinguishing between the
Hindus and Muslims; Pran Nath, who was known for his extreme religious
eclecticism and Dhani Dharmadas, who claimed to be a direct disciple of Kabir
though there is no concrete evidence to support this assertion.
The teachings and philosophy of Guru Nanak constitute an important
component of Indian philosophy and thought. The Sikh movement had its
origin in the preachings of Nanak. His philosophy comprised three basic
elements: a leading charismatic personality (the Guru), ideology (Shabad) and
organization (Sangat). Nanak evaluated and criticized the prevailing religious
beliefs and attempted to establish a true religion which could lead to
salvation. He repudiated idol worship and did not favour pilgrimage nor
accepted the theory of incarnation.

He condemned formalism and ritualism. He believed in the unity of God and

laid emphasis on having a true Guru for revelation. Nanak made an attempt to
unify the Hindus and Muslims and certainly succeeded in synthesizing within
his own teachings the essential concepts of Hinduism and Islam. He advised
people to follow the principles of conduct and worship: sach (truth), halal
(lawful earning), Khair (wishing well of others), niyat (right intention) and
service of the lord. Nanak denounced the caste system and the inequaiity
which it perpetrated. He said that caste and honour should be judged by the
acts or deeds of the individuals. He believed in Universal brotherhood of man
and equality of men and women. He championed the cause of women's
emancipation and condemned the sati pratha. He laid stress on concepts like
justice, righteousness and liberty.

The transformation of Sikhism from genuine eclecticism to psychological

resistance to Islam was inherent in Sikhism itself. It was under Guru Arjun,
who succeeded to the Guruship in 1581 Sikhism became rebellious against the
Mughal authority. Although, he was executed for his defiance, his advise to his
son Hargobind to sit firmly on the throne and raise an army seems to have
cemented the hostile relations between the Sikhs and the Mughals. It was
Guru Gobind Singh, who during the reign of Aurangzeb embarked upon a
career of open hostility against the Muslims. He created the Sikh military
community known as ‘khalsa’, which took upon itself the vow to uphold the 5
ks: kesh ( a beard), kirpan, kangha ( a comb); kara ( a steel bangle) and
kachcha (loin cloth). The members were also expected to follow certain rules
and regulations, which included refrain from having carnal intercourse with
Muslims, eating meat cut the Muslim way, to abstain from tobacco and
intoxicants and to not cut the hair.

A corresponding change also metamorphosed the Sikh religion. Though they

continued to reject idol-worship its syncretic character receded more and
more into the background, and in practice, in ritual and in social affinities
Hindu influences became more and more pronounced. It failed in one of its
original objectives i.e. liquidation of the caste system; and retained or
reintroduced into its social behavior caste restriction on marriages and
sometimes dining together between various Sikh castes. Even the character of
Sikh monotheism changed under Guru Gobind Singh, who elevated God’s
destructive over His constructive power, elevated death to the status of
divinity; and steel came to be worshipped as a symbol of destruction. He
selected the Hindu diety Durga or the power of Mahadeva as a special object
of worship and ‘ya Durga’ became the war-cry of the khalsa. The trend of
reversion of Sikhism towards Hinduism continued during the subsequent
generations as well. According to Khuswant Singh, after about a 100 years of
Guru Gobind Singh’s death the rituals in the Gurudwara resembled the rituals
of a Hindu temple and more often than not were presided over by priests, who
were Hindu. Sikhs began to wear caste-marks, Sikh weddings and funerals
followed Hindu patterns and marriages with Hindus according to their
customs were also encouraged. According to Aziz Ahmad, the transformation
of Sikhism from an eclectic faith, which had come into being to bring
Hinduism and Islam closer and to be a bridge between them, into a fanatically
anti-Muslim militant group idealizing destruction, is the most tragic instance
of failure of syncretism in India.

R.P. Bahuguna has, however, argued that one should not overemphasize the
transgression of the later sant movements from their original intentions or
nature. He argues that while the later sants may have been obscure figures in
comparison to the sants of the earlier period like Kabir, Raidas etc they
continued to draw inspiration from their teachings and preached religious
and social ideas that were not very different from those advocated by their
predecessors. Thus, he believes that the tendency to blame the later sants for
moving towards a more orthodox framework is just a myth and over
exaggeration. He believes that the later sant movements were greatly counter-
hegemonic in nature and were sustained by the ideological foundations of the
early sants and the personalities of the new sants.

Thus, to conclude one can see that just like Islam, even Hinduism and Sikhism
were characterized by both these trends of liberalism and orthodoxy. The
Bhakti movement, as well as Sikhism in its nascent stage, aimed at uprooting
the existing system based on scriptural knowledge, caste distinctions, formal
rituals and human gurus. However, it was by the 17 th century that the later
sants were unable to preserve the radical tempo of the earlier sant
movements, which gradually began to wither away and give way to a more
‘Hinduised’ or ‘Brahmanical’ order. While, this has been questioned by some
scholars like Bahuguna other scholars like Grewal, Chandra and Aziz Ahmad
among others believe that there was a marked difference by the later phase of
this movement. This according to Satish Chandra was largely an outcome of
the existing orthodoxy that was rooted in the structure of the Indian society.
Thus, while, these liberal movements may have influenced the elites as well as
the non-elites, they were unable to completely uproot the existing system or
even transform it as it had initially intended on doing.

Bibliography

 Satish Chandra- Medieval India; Volume II

 Aziz Ahmad- Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment
 S.A.A. Rizvi- History of Sufism in India; Volume II
 Irfan Habib (article)- The Political Role of Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi and
Shah Waliullah
 S.A.A. Rizvi (article)- Naqshbandi Influence on Mughal rulers and
Politics
 J.S.Grewal- Kabir and the Kabir Panthis
 J.S.Grewal and Indu Banga- Dadu and the Dadu-Panthis
 Shahabuddin Iraqi- Bhakti Movement in Medieval India- Social and
Political Perspectives
 Class notes
 IGNOU readings