The Mughal emperor’s approach to religion was a lesson in world peace. His ideal of tolerance towards all faiths is what the world we live in currently needs, writes Madan Lall Manchanda
Mughal emperor Abu’l-Fath Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar, better known as Akbar, used to be often remembered for his state policy as it promoted secularism and was aimed at ‘Sulh-i-Kul’ or universal peace and amity. Unfortunately, today he is a maligned historical personage in some parts of Pakistan. Akbar had extended his domain over a large territory and created what was often called the world’s mightiest empire at that time. Yet, some of the historians and authors of text books in Pakistan either do not mention his name or tarnish his image by accusing him instead of Aurangzeb for the downfall of the Mughal Empire. The reason advanced for this is that the latter had vehemently criticised Akbar’s incorporation of non-Muslims in a Muslim State. He has been criticised for bringing Hindus and Muslims together in his empire. The policies pursued by him contradict the two-nation theory which eventually led to the Partition of the sub-continent and the formation of Pakistan. Akbar, then, is seen as someone whose ideas threatened to put the Mughal Empire in ‘danger’ and later even made the demand for a separate nation based on religion seem baseless.
Though Muslims were still the dominant group, the Mughal Empire under him had ceased to be solely Muslim-run. It’s argued that this emperor ended up weakening Islam to the extent where its dominance in the affairs of the State could not be restored. Akbar is also held ‘guilty’ for the tolerance that he exhibited towards Hindus. He, in particular, favoured Rajputs. Rajputs, in turn, gained prominence during his rule. Had Man Singh I and Bhagwan Das not joined Akbar, they might have gone unnoticed in history. One negative effect of Akbar’s Rajput policy was that he could no longer depend on the support of his nobles who, too, had lost confidence in him.
Akbar’s introduction of a religious philosophy known as Din-i Ilahi (religion of God) was an ill fated attempt aimed at combining the salient features of Islam with Hinduism. For doing so, Akbar is accused of having tried to distort Islam as some of its followers believe that Islam is not supposed to absorb contradictory tendencies and beliefs from other religions.
Perhaps Akbar, who indubitably laid a strong foundation of secularism during his eventful regime, happens to be a square peg in a round hole in the context of the realities in Pakistan today. Nevertheless, it is quite uncharitable to ignore the magnificent role played by Akbar to consolidate the Mughal Empire through sustained efforts to secure the goodwill and co-operation of a vast segment of a multi-racial society.
Moderation in religious outlook was something that he internalised quite early in his life. Born to Emperor Humayun and Hamida Banu Begum on November 23, 1542, under the hospitable roof of a Rajput Chief, Akbar is believed to have inherited tolerance from his mother. Later on, his tutor Abdul Latif instilled a liberal outlook in him. Akbar’s contact with Sufis like Shaikh Abu al-Fazal ibn Mubarak and his sons further influenced him and helped shape his liberal religious ideas. It led him to declare his much acclaimed policy of ‘Sulh-i-Kul,’ which was in keeping with the best traditions of our country. Akbar was truly a free thinker. He took pains to acquire basic knowledge of Jainism and was moved by its cult of compassion. He came under the spell of Jesuit teachers and was publicly reverential towards Jesus Christ and Virgin Mary. He was equally fascinated by the Parsi form of worship.
The motivation for a close contact with various religions stemmed from his desire for all communities to live in peace and amicably practice different faiths. Although he was not highly educated, Akbar thought that religious harmony was the only way for achieving this cherished goal. Therefore, he made concerted efforts in this direction. His famous Ibadat Khana (at Fatehpur Sikri), a house to hold religious discourses of all faiths was a notable step in this regard. Thus, Akbar himself became the torch bearer for the fundamental unity of various faiths which differed only on the surface.
But it would be wrong to brand Akbar as either a religious philosopher or a theologian. Neither was he a ruler with jumbled religious perception nor a zealot wishing to produce something sensational with the aim of leaving his mark in history. He was simply a practical politician. Out of his 50 top men, only 18, including Birbal, had accepted ‘Din-i Ilahi’. Man Singh was notable among those who refused to accept it.
It was not his way to force his will in religious matters. But he spared no efforts to win his subjects over. Not only did he abolish unjust laws, do away with discriminatory taxes and stop slaughter of animals, he also took bold steps like making a public appearance while wearing a tilak (common in Hindus) on his forehead. He indulged in Sun worship and observed a fast on Shivratri. He also took a vow to refrain from hunting. Nobody can say with certainty whether Akbar adopted such practices in keeping with the craft of State governance or to earn popularity. It is, however, often said that his heart was not touched by any religion and that no one knew his religion per se. There is no denying the fact that he was intensely devoted to God and longed to have communion with that which is infinite. Chroniclers believe that he sometimes spent whole nights repeating the name of Allah. On many mornings, he would sit by himself in prayer on a large flat stone in an old building near Fatehpur Sikri.
At the same time, Akbar was a wise statesman and a practical politician. He did not allow any religious interference in the matters of the State. He knew the art to subdue, if not to extinguish a murmur of dissent. He ruthlessly curbed actual revolt on account of his secular approach and issued several royal firmans. He even assumed the role of Supreme Pontiff. He was a staunch secularist and no amount of opposition from ignorant persons could wean him from his chosen path. There is, however, no evidence that Muslims were persecuted in his rule. Akbar became a symbol of tolerance and enlightenment. He has been described by our first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and as the ‘father of Indian nationalism’.
The seeds of secularism sown by him and others in the long course of our history have sprouted after a lapse of centuries in our Constitution. In his recently published book, Of Saffron Flags and Skullcaps: Hindutva, Muslim Identity and the Idea of India, Zia-us-Salam, reproduces excerpts from reports published in old English daily newspapers that detail how Akbar gave India a stable administration for close to 50 years through a mix of military prowess and acumen. A contemporary of Akbar and a Jesuit, Father Monserrate, opined that by tolerating all faiths, Akbar practically dismissed the ‘extreme forms’ of all religions. He was a hero that nobody could hate. Yet, religious fundamentalists continue to make efforts to project Akbar as a diminutive ruler so that all his accomplishments can be questioned.
Early in 2017, an attempt was made to rename Akbar’s Fort in Ajmer. In May, 2016, efforts were made to rename Akbar Road in New Delhi or to rewrite history and text books in Rajasthan in order to establish that Akbar was not the winner of the Battle of Haldighati. Interestingly, Akbar is said to have stayed away from that battle, leaving the responsibility to Rajputs such as Man Singh. Attempts have been made to undermine Akbar’s contribution towards nation building and to project him as the ‘New age Aurangzeb’.
The bottom line is that fighting over the facts can’t possibly lead to anything profound. But following the ideal of Din-i Ilahi might. India, Pakistan, and in fact all of today’s world would do well to follow the glorious example of mutual respect and tolerance set by Akbar.
