Indian Express’s headline reads, ‘Two exhibitions on Amir Khusrau celebrate the pluralist philosopher‘. Pluralist philosopher !! There are numerous web sites too dedicated to Amir Khusru, describing him as pluralist and as a Sufi saint. Aparna Chatterjee, another expert on Indian culture and music, describes him as a saint, spiritualist, poet, composer and a historian and that the world view of Amir Khusru is of ‘SECULARISM’. But a major Indian news paper describing Amir Khusru as pluralistic is indicative of the kind of propaganda (or by concealing and distorting history of Islamic rule in India) that Indian Hindus were subjected to by alliance of leftist-inspired and Nehruvian historians. But it is Bollywood which should be credited with creating and taking the myth that Sufism was peaceful to ordinary people. To say that Sufism in India is peaceful and non-violent is insulting to Indian culture and humanity when its (Sufism’s) history is shrouded with blood, violence and unlimited hatred and intolerance towards Hindus and others.
I wrote earlier about important Sufi saints like Nizamuddin Auliya and Moinuddin Chsthi etc. whose darghas Hindus visit so innocently ( here ). It has even become fashionable for actors and actresses in India to visit these darghas of murderers to prove their allegiance to Indian versions of secularism and pluralism, thereby to get cheap publicity in media.
Amir Khusru was a favorite disciple of Sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya. It is said that he was born to a Turkish soldier and Rajput Hindu woman, when she was taken as a sex slave. He was contemporary of Allauddin Khilji. He wrote prose and poetry, and history too. His work on history, TARIKH-I ALAI (also referred to as KHAZAINU FUTUH), is considered authoritative because Barani, another famous historian at the time of Allauddin Khilji, consults him on many matters for his writings as Amir Khusru accompanied Allauddin’s armies in numerous campaigns against Hindu kingdoms, as part of Jihad.
His bigoted mind and his intolerance and hatred towards Hindus is not only visible, even becomes remarkable feature of his writings. His description of victory of Islam and Muslims over natives in India reveals his bigotry :
“The tongue of the sword of the Khalifa of the time, which is the tongue of flame of Islam, has imparted light to the entire darkness of Hindustan by the illumination of its guidance….On the other side so much dust arose from battered the temple of Somnat that even the sea was not able to lay it, and on the right hand and the left hand the army has conquered from sea to sea, and several capitals of the Gods of the Hindus, in which Satanism has prevailed since the time of Jinns, have been demolished. All these impurities of infidelity have been cleansed by the Sultan’s destruction of idol temples, beginning with his first holy expeditions against Deogir, so that flames of light of the law illuminate all these unholy countries, and the places for the criers to prayer are exalted on high, and prayers are read in mosques. Allah be praised.”
He was so delightful in the destruction of temples and killing of Hindus. Of course, we still should believe he was a saint or saint-like and that he was against non-violence.
Amir Khusru describes many more campaigns of macabre by Muslim armies, but no where he shows any sympathy or regret over such destruction, killings, pillage and enslavement of Hindus including women and children. Most of the time, right after giving a description of these killings he ends it with, ‘Allah be praised’…..
In description of conquest of CHITOR, he writes :
“On Monday, the 8th Jumada-s sani, A.H. 702, the loud drums proclaimed the royal march from Delhi, undertaken with a view to the capture of Chitor. The author accompanied the expedition. The fort was taken on Monday, the 11th of Muharram, A.H 703 (August, 1303 AD). The Rai fled, and afterwords he surrendered, and was secured against the lightning of scimitar ….After ordering a massacre of thirty thousand Hindus, he bestowed the Govt. of Chitor upon his son, Khizar Khan and named the place Khizrabad. He then returned towards Delhi. “Praise be to God ! that he so ordered the massacre of all chiefs of Hindustan out of the pale of Islam by his infidel smiting sword.”
And in the description of utter destruction of MA’BAR(present day Tamilanadu), he writes delightfully and poetically :
“Malik ordered a general massacre at Kandur and left in search of elephants. …Later he returned to Kandur and he heard that in Brahmastpuri there was a golden idol, around which elephants were stabled. The Malik started on a night expedition against this place, and in the morning seized no less than two and hundred and fifty Elephants. He then determined on razing the beautiful temple to the ground, — “you might say that it was the paradise of Shaddad, which, after being lost, those hellites had found, and that it was the Golden Lanka of Ram” — “the roof was covered with rubies and emeralds” – “in short, it was the holy place of the Hindus, which the Malik dug up from its foundation with the greatest care,” — “and the heads of the Brahmans and idolaters danced from their necks and fell to the ground at their feet” and blood flowed in torrents……The Muslamans destroyed all the Lings, “and Deo Narain fell down, and the other Gods who had fixed their seats there raised their feet, and jumped so high that in one leap they reached the fort of Lanka, and in that affright the lings themselves would have fled has they had any legs to stand on.” Much Gold and valuable jewels fell in to the hands of the Musslamans, who returned to the Royal canopy, after executing their holy project, on the 13nth Z-1 kada. 710 A.H (April, 1310 A.D.)They destroyed all the temples at Birdhul, and placed the plunder in public treasury. ”
He describes all this as holy project ! Still, he must be saintly and plural.
Amir Khusru is no different from other Muslim historians in depicting Hindus or Hindu kings as aggressors with pride and haughtiness and as accursed, when its clear that it was Khilji who was the aggressor….this view of his is in clear accordance with Islamic theology on Jihad, for it says that mere presence of disbelief in Islam is an act of aggression on Islam and Muslims, which Muslims should end through Jihad. He writes conquest of Malwa, in line with Koranic description of Non-Muslims refusing to convert to Islam, as :
“On Southern border of Hindustan, Rai Malhak Deo, of Malwa, and Koka, his Pardhan, who had under command thirty or forty thousand cavalry and infantry without number, boasting of their large force , had rubbed their eyes with the antimony of pride ………..A select army of royal troops was appointed, and suddenly fell on those blind and bewildered men. Victory itself preceded them and had her eyes fixed upon the road to see when the triumphant army would arrive, Until the dust of army arose, the vision of their eyes was closed. The blows of swords then descended upon them, their heads were cut-off, and the earth was moistened with Hindu blood. The accursed Koka was slain and his head was sent to Sultan. ….”
In his poem Ashika, he writes :
“Happy Hindustan, the splendor of religion (i.e.), where the law [Shariat i.e. Islamic law] finds perfect honor and security. In learning Delhi can now compete with Bokhara, for Islam has been made manifest by its Kings. The whole country, by means of the sword of our holy warriors, has become like forest denuded of its thorns by fire. The land has been saturated with the water of the sword, and the vapors of infidelity have been dispersed. The strong men of Hind have been trodden under foot, and all ready to pay tribute. Islam is triumphant, Idolatry [Hinduism] is subdued. Had not the law granted exemption from death by payment of poll tax, the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished. Cawing crows see no arrows pointed at them ; nor is the Tarsa (Christian) there, who does not fear (taras) to render the servant equal with God ; nor the Jew who dares to exalt the Pentateuch to a level with the Kuran; nor the Magli who is delighted with the worship of fire, but of whom the fire complains with its hundred tongues. The four sects of Musulmans are at amity, and the very fish are Sunnis.” ( 1 )
‘Cawing crows’ are the words often used by him (and many other Muslim writers) to describe Hindus. Ofcourse, he still must be saintly and secular as our eminent historians and intellectuals describe period of India under Islamic rule as golden period.
( 1 ) :: In India, it is Hanafi school of Islam that was followed. Its law book (book of Sharia law) is called ‘Hidaya’. Its only in this school that conquered ‘idolaters’ like Hindus and Buddhists can be allowed to live if they pay jizya and agree to live under Dhimmah (the set of humiliating conditions imposed on Non-Muslims). In other 3 schools of Sunni Islam, conquered ‘idolaters’ either have to convert to Islam or die. There is no third choice.