Abul fazl, Barani, hobbes, indian political thought PDF

Preview

Summary

INDIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT – ABUL FAZL(Special focus on Kingship theory)Introduction:-Medieval India had many eminent historians and among them Sheikh Abul Fazl (1551–1602) occupies a place of distinction. This is mainly because of the predominance of intellectual elements in his writings, his unfaili...

Description

INDIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT – ABUL FAZL (Special focus on Kingship theory)

Introduction:Medieval India had many eminent historians and among them Sheikh Abul Fazl (1551–1602) occupies a place of distinction. This is mainly because of the predominance of intellectual elements in his writings, his unfailing appeal to reason against religious and cultural traditions, broader view of history and a new methodology which he sought to apply to his task. His interpretation of history was integrally linked to the political, social, economic and religious realities of that period. The advent of Islam in India led to the injection of an important element in Indian Political Thought which was based on 3 basic principles which governed all subsequent political thinking.These were:a)The divine law, the Shariat based on the Quran, b) Historical traditions of the early years and c) the consensus and solidarity of the Islamic community. Since the Islamic thought accepted the finality of the Shariat, the role of reason was limited to interpretation of one book which resulted in greater dogmatism of belief. However, during the Mughal period, a striking transition took place in the relationship between religion and the state. The process of assimilation gathered momentum. It is this ‘liberal and human approach’ that is found in Fazl’s Ain-i-Akbari which is the administrative record of Akbar’s reign. The Akbarnama written by Fazl talked about Akbar, his philosophy, rule and empire and his flexible diplomacy and economic policy which enabled him to sustain his empire. To understand Abul Fazl’s thought, knowing his antecedents and career becomes important as it had an influence on his writings. Fazl was born in Agra in the family of renowned scholar, Shaikh Mubarak who turned to Sufism, Ishraq and the truths of Iba Barani.Therefore, Abul Fazal was a man of wide culture and pure spiritual ideals. Fazl believed that all men are equal in their brotherhood and there should be basic unity in all religions and religion differences should not be allowed to destroy the harmony of the society. With the victory of Babur over Ibraham Lodhi, the Mughal dynasty was established and a new idea of integrated culture emerged which had elements from both Hindu and Islamic thoughts. The primary message was that ‘no religion is inferior to any other’. Abul Fazal pointed out that cause of the conflicts between Hindus and Muslims are their conflicting interests and perceptions, diversity of language, inflexibility of customs and lower level of wisdom. He was appointed as a courtier, historian and even a great advisor to Akbar, the greatest of all Mughal rulers. Fazl had a rational and secular approach accompanied with a methodology of critical investigation towards history.

Elements incorporated in Fazl’s writings:1)Political Authority and Sovereignty The dominant influences which led to the formulation of ideas of political authority by Fazl was derived from Ibn Arabi, a celebrated Muslim philosopher. In Fazl’s political thought, both religion and secular

sphere are placed at par, and as equally illusory being products of a false Duality.This immediately liberates temporal sovereignty from dictates of theological doctrine. Hence, Fazl then locates the basis of sovereignty in the needs of the social order. Here his reasoning follows the pure dictates of reason, appealing to the tradition of philosophy and science. Fazl incorporates a theory of ‘Social Contract’ to justify the necessity of political authority. He talks about the differences among mankind and their conflicting desires.In such situations, relief is not possible except through the punitive power of a single man which is the Padshah (emperor). Believing in the divine inspiration theory of kingship, the king was considered as the “origin of stability and possession”. Under the influence of Ishraq tradition, Abul Fazl puts temporal sovereignty at the highest station in the hierarchy of objects receiving spiritual light. He believes that “the sovereign is not a shadow but rather a recipient of divine light, possessor of illuminated wisdom and the reflector of the light received”. Since not all worldly sovereigns receive such light, he devises the concept of ‘just and unjust’sovereign.

2) Theory of Kingship : Ideal and Divine Akbar's theory of kingship was presented by Abul Fazal in Akbarnama. Ain-i- Akbari, the third volume of Akbarnama is a great treatise on government, bureaucracy, military, legal system and administration of Akbar's reign. In his political ideas, Abul Fazl accepted the ‘divine inspiration theory of kingship’. Fazl's basic concept was of a liberal absolutism under a ruler of high endeavour, endowed with the highest moral and spiritual qualities and enjoying heaven's mandate so that he was not dependent on any set of religious leaders for legitimisation. According to Abul Fazl, the term Padshahat (Badshahat) meant ‘an established owner’ where ‘Pad’ stands for stability and ‘shah’ stands for owner. Padshah therefore, means powerful and established ruler who cannot be defeated by anyone. The Padshah having a superior place, exercised ultimate authority on all social, economic, political and judicial matters. He believes that only a ‘just ruler’ can convert the bad into good by gathering loyal helpers, a large treasury and soldiers. Fazl says that a ruler acquires his qualities to rule by prayer and devotion, through a large heart and paternal love for the people.An Ideal King is compared to a ‘father’, obliged to fulfil his responsibilities for common welfare. Abul Fazal defines sovereignty as a contract under which the 'just emperor' protects four essences of the his subjects: Jaan(life), Maal(property), Namus(honour) and Din(religion). In return, the godly king demands obedience and share of resources through the 'wages of protection'. For such a task, no wages or taxes could be too high but Fazl states that ‘just sovereigns do not take more than what suffices their task’. The identification of ‘just sovereign’ is done by Fazl when he uses the imagery of ‘divine light’(also known as farri- izidi). For Fazl, royalty is a light from the Almighty and a ray from the world-illuminating Sun. This explains the direct link between God and the ruler, hence no one stands in between. The emperor being divinely ordained is not subjected to any human law but only the law of God and is regarded as a spiritual guide to the people.This meant but not explicitly stated that subjects do not have authority to check upon the powers of King and ideologically the monarch was not subject to any legal or political principles.

It is evident in the writings of Abul Fazl, that Akbar was interested in establishing the authority of king over all the other elements of state. In 1579, through a decree named Mahzar, Akbar became the supreme interpreter of law (Shariyat) subordinating the Ullamas. Later, Akbar even declared himself as the final authority in religious disputes i.e. Imam-e-Adil. Evidently for Fazl, Akbar was the divine and ideal king (Padshah) as he was his courtier and also his sincere admirer. Abul Fazal presents highly exalted status of the king through many symbols, metaphors and miniature painting which depicts Akbar as a divine, enlightened and infallible personality. However, Fazl states that not all worldly sovereigns receive such light.He blames the simple minded people for not distinguishing between the ‘godly ruler’ and a ‘self- seeking aspirant for authority’.Fazl says that only the ‘enlightened beings’ can discriminate between these two because the ‘rule of the godly rulers’ is long lasting and marked by peace and justice’ and that of the selfish ones is ‘short-lived’ and marked by ‘terror, cruelty and theft’. Abul Fazl's basic concept was of a liberal absolutism under a ruler of high endeavour, endowed with the highest moral and spiritual qualities and enjoying heaven's mandate so that he was not dependent on any set of religious leaders for legitimisation.

3) Functions of the Just Sovereign :In Abul Fazl’s view, The Godly Ruler was to be recognised by the functions he carried out. Fazl enumerates the qualities of strong will, God worship, quickness in getting relief to seekers etc. as some of the crucial parameters. He assigns the two most important functions to just sovereign, namely the religious tolerance and respect for Reason, twin major departures from mainstream political thought in Islam. A) Firstly, the king is required to fulfill his obligation of being a father of mankind. It was crucial to maintain a tolerance of conflicting faiths in the society. Abul Fazal incorporates the concept of Sulh-i-kul i.e. absolute peace. This concept is directly invoked by Ibn Arabi's philosophy. The path of Sulh-i-kul promotes the tolerance of all religious diversity and sectarian differences to recognise the transcendental unity. ) Defending the concept of Sulh-i-kul, Fazl underlines that it was necessary for a king endowed with farr-i- izidi to establish peace and stability by not permitting "the dust of sectarian strife to arise". Sulh-i-kul was doubtlessly something to be pursued by an individual. Abul Fazl lists his success in attaining sulh-i-kul through the favour of his Majesty’s attention. Sometimes, this consisted of turning from speech to silence, making friendship with good men of all communities and ultimately accepting excuses and making peace with the bad. For the Ruler, Sulh-i-kul meant a policy of tolerating all religious and other differences. Beginning from 1578-79, Akbar adopted the position of Sulh-i-kul, opening a discourse with leading men of all religions and appointed men of different faiths to high office. Sulh -i- kul was a philosophical principal and the urge for its pursuit owed much to the position of Mughal empire, being situated in a multi religious country. This as a state policy accorded closely with the patriotism for Hindustan which both Akbar and Fazl openly encouraged.

B) The second function of a just sovereign is that ‘he shall not seek popular acclaim through opposing reason’. Despite Fazl’s extensive use of sufic concepts he remained steadfast in his allegiance to ‘reason and science’. This was important because Fazl believed that rationalism offered an opposition to orthodox traditionalism.

4) Justice:Justice emerges as a cornerstone of social organisation and is defined as social harmony.It is the coordination and balance of the conflicting claims of diverse interest groups. Fazl states that since all societies are composed of diverse interests, the King must take all possible care to maintain the health of society. Justice was considered as the the highest virtue of the monarch. A number of symbols were created for visual representation of the idea of justice. One such representation is figure of lion And lamb peacefully nestling next to each other. The emphasis on the desirability of Justice is argued from the point of view of a ‘secular ethic’. It was the duty of the just ruler to maintain equilibrium in society. The principles of Justice were based on customary law; they embodied the inherited habit of the living in Indian society. But the ultimate interpretation of the meaning of these principles was left to the emperor. The King should ensure that he is directly accessible to his public at least once a week to listen to their grievances. A prime advice to the king is to consider his subjects as his sons and friends irrespective of their faith. The notion of justice above the king creating limitations on his authority was considered bad to the maintenance of social hierarchy. Fazl wrote, "when God bestows sovereignty upon a choicest one, he exalts him with far seeing reasons, wide forbearance and the priceless jewels of justice, so that he might place familiar friends and strangers in the same balance".(V.R. Mehta)

5) Type of administrative structure:In Abul Fazl’s writings, there is a strong belief that a centralised monarchial form of government which is above the customary law, is the best form. Fazl argued that for proper administration, we need to divide the authority and appoint various officials to look after different aspects of the state because the strength of one person is not sufficient. The whole state was divided into many levels, each manned by officers of various kinds.The stand out feature is the personal interest which the king should take in the affairs of the state. There was a system of hierarchy i.e. Mansabdars, Nazims and Subedars, Parganas and Sub-divisional officers, Jagirdars and Quazis. Each of them was permitted to approach the ruler directly.

6) Divison of society:Following the Hindu thought, Abul Fazl divided the society into four parts.The first place was assigned to the warriors and rulers. The second place was given to learned men such as scholars, astronomers and philosophers among others.The third place was accorded to artisans and merchants.The last place was given to labourers and husbandmen. One can notice lines of resemblance with the caste system as well as with Plato’s ideal state from which Abul Fazl derived inspiration. In this scheme, division is not based

on four classes but four different parts of a hierarchy in which the principle of rule and a subordination prevails.

Conclusion:For Abul Fazl, the empire as constructed by Akbar and governed by him was the ideal state. In Akbar’s regime, there was a certain element of compassion, a restraint in the operations of punitive apparatus, a systemization taken to the extent of creating a quasi-constitution and a degree of religious tolerance. Fazl unlike Barani locates the basis of State in a species of social contract and the divine illuminated wisdom of the mystic tradition. He introduces the secular element of the state unlike his predecessors where people have equal claim to benevolence from the ruler irrespective of their faiths. However, Fazl’s stout espousal of the protection of rationalism by the state looks odd when we see him making use of mystic theories to justify the rule of the King. Abul Fazl’s obvious theoretical weakness is that he never comes to grip with his contradictions but despite these shortcomings, Abul Fazl’s elaborative theory of the State make him a liberal thinker as compared to other scholars of that time....