Dara Shikoh: The Sufi Prince
Editor’s Note: At a time in its history when the Pakistani State is hostage to the Anti-India Jihadi enterprise of its security establishment, we the people of Pakistan can look to such universal heroes like the seventeenth century Mughal Prince, Dara Shikoh. Here was a man who possessed the humanity to see spirituality in everything and who celebrated coexistence, tolerance and diversity. His death at the hands of his twisted, bigoted and sectarian younger brother, Aurangzeb and the latter’s ascension to the throne marked a turning point, not just in the history of South Asia but as events later unfolded, in the world itself.
Aurangzeb’s harsh reign saw the State persecuting its Hindu and Shia muslim populations that culminated in the imposition of Jaziya and the destruction of the Shia kingdoms of Golconda and Bijapur in South India. In most ways, Aurangzeb’s reign was a departure from the relatively secular and syncretic reign of the earlier Mughals that culminated with that of the thoughtful and tolerant Dara.
“His most famous work, Majma-ul-Bahrain (“The Confluence of the Two Seas”), was also devoted to a revelation of the mystical and pluralistic affinities between Sufic and Vedantic speculation.” (Source: Wikipedia)
On the one hand, Dara the thoughtful intellectual translated the Vedic texts from Sanskrit to Persian. In this endeavour, he wanted to highlight that truth, humanity and spirituality are universal and are not bound by ideology. Aurangzeb’s view was dominated by a brutish view of the world which would only tolerate his stark views. Today, Aurangzeb is represented by the security establishment, the Judiciary, the media and right-wing Pro-Taliban Islamist politicians like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif , the various Jihadi groups and the Taliban.
In the establishment-dominated narrative of the Pakistani State, his intellectual pursuits and tolerant worldview made Dara a deviant. His brutal execution by the cold-blooded Aurangzeb, along with that of his friend, Sachal Sarmast, ruptured the bonds that had developed between the muslims and hindus. Today, when shrines are being attacked by the security establishment-backed Jihadis, supporters of Pakistan’s People’s Party must remember the party culture is deeply influenced by the humane culture of the shrines. During the MRD movement, the shrines served as asylums for some PPP activists.
The Anti Zia protests by the Punjab Nujawan Mahaz) at Madu LaL shrine in Lahore highlight the fact that shrines are a powerful symbol of resistance against the security establishment in Pakistan. No wonder they are being attacked by the Jihadis. ISI stooges like Imran Khan will never take out a dharna against this attack on Pakistani culture. We are pleased to cross-post the following note that was posted by Safoora on her blog, “A Sufi Metamorphosis“
Dara Shikoh is what Pakistan should be!
DARA SHIKOH: THe Sufi prince
DARA Shikoh, the eldest son of Shah Jehan, has a very special place in the hearts of the people of Lahore. He was a sufi mrtyre and an gnostic and unitarian.
Thus, Dara says, referring to the Divine:
You dwell in the Ka’aba and in Somnath [a famous Shaivite Hindu temple]
And in the hearts of the enamoured lovers.
DARA’s initiation into Sufism:
UNITY OF GOD: SYNTHESIS OF SUFISM & VEDANTA:
In pursuit of this aim, Dara now set about seeking to learn more about the religious systems of the Hindus. He studied Sanskrit, and, with the help of the Pandits of Benaras, made a Persian translation of the Upanishads, which was later followed by his Persian renderings of the Gita and the Yoga Vasishta.
The Majma-ul Bahrain is divided into twenty-two sections, in each of which Dara seeks to draw out the similarities between Hindu and Sufi concepts and teachings.
My chief reason for this noble command [to have the Yoga Vasishta translated] is that although I had profited by pursuing a translation of the Yoga Vasishta ascribed to Shaikh Sufi, yet once two saintly persons appeared in my dreams; one of whom was tall, whose hair was gray, the other short and without any hair. The former was Vasishta and the latter Ram Chandra, and as I had read the translation already alluded to, I was naturally attracted to them and paid them my respects. Vasisht was very kind to me and patted me on the back, and, addressing Ram Chandra, told him that I was brother to him because both he and I were seekers after truth. He asked Ram Chandra to embrace me, which he did in exuberance of love. Thereupon, Vasishta gave some sweets to Ram Chandra, which I also took and ate. After this vision, a desire to cause the translation of the book intensified in me.
Dara’s translation of certain Hindu scriptures into Persian represents a landmark in the process of developing bridges of understanding between people of different faiths in medieval India, in which the Sufis played the leading role. One of Dara’s earliest attempts at translation was his rendering of the Gita into Persian. Keenly interested as he was in the philosophy of Yoga, slator of the text opens his treatise with praises of God and the Prophet Muhammad thus:
I was enamoured of studying books on the ways of the men of the Path and had in my mind nothing save the understanding of the Unity of God; and before this, in a state of ecstasy and enthusiasm, I had uttered some words pertaining to sublime knowledge, because of which certain bigoted and narrow-minded people accused me of heresy and apostasy. It was then that I realised the importance of compiling the aphorisms of great believers in the Unity of God and the sayings of saints who have, hitherto, acquired knowledge of Reality, so that these may serve as an argument against those who are really imposters.
In the Hasanat ul-‘Arifin, Dara bitterly criticises those self-styled ‘ulama who, ignoring the inner dimension of the faith, focus simply on external rituals. His critique is directed against mindless ritualism emptied of inner spiritual content, and he challenges the claims of the ‘ulama who would readily trade their faith for worldly gain. Thus, he says:
May the world be free from the noise of the Mulla
And none should pay any heed to their fatwas.
Due to the vicious and ignominious conduct of the mulla.
The Safinat ul-Auliya is Dara’s second biography of various Sufi saints. Unlike the Sakinat ul-Auliya, which deals with Sufis of various orders, this book discusses only the Qadri Sufis of India. Dara himself was a Qadri, and as he puts it, ‘Nothing attracts me more than this Qadri order, which has fulfilled my spiritual aspirations’. The Qadri order, one of the most popular and widespread of all the Sufi silsilahs, traces its origins to the Prophet through the twelfth century Sufi and Islamic scholar of great renown, Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jilani of Baghdad. The Sakinat ul-Auliya was completed in 1642 C.E., when Dara was 28 years old, three years after his first meeting with the Qadri Sufi Miyan Mir. In the same year, Dara came into contact with another leading Qadri saint, Mulla Shah Badakshani (d. 1642 C.E.), who, like Miyan Mir, exercised a particularly powerful influence on Dara, which is readily apparent in his description of the practices of the Qadris in the Sakinat ul-Auliya.
The text goes on to discuss the thirty stages (manazil) on the Sufi path, the first of which is detachment from the materialistic world and the last of which is realisation of the Truth. Broadly the same theme is discussed in the Risala-i Haq Numa, where the seeker (salik) is shown as starting from the Alam-i Nasut or ‘The Physical Plane’, and, passing through various stages, finally reaching the Alam-i Lahut or ‘the Plane of Absolute Truth’. Some of the physical exercises employed by the Sufis that are described in the Risala-i Haq Numa are shown by Dara to be similar to those used by the Hindu Tantriks and Yogis. These include astral healing and concentration on the centres of meditation in the heart and brain. Further, he suggests that the four planes through which the Sufi seeker’s journey takes him-Nasut , Jabrut, Malakut and Lahut-correspond to the Hindu concept of the Avasthanam or the four ‘states’ of Jagrat, Swapna, Shushpati and Turiya.
On Monotheism [tauhid]
God’s face is ever face to face.
Whatever you behold except Him is the object of your fancy,
Things other than He have an existence like a mirage.
The existence of God is like a boundless ocean,
People are like forms and waves in its water.
Though I do not consider myself separate from Him,
Yet I do not consider myself God.
Whatever relation the drop bears with the ocean,
That I hold true in my belief, and nothing beyond.
We have not seen an atom separate from the Sun,
Every drop of water is the sea in itself.
With what name should one call the Truth?
Every name that exists is one of God’s names.
On Divine Love ;
And from your message rains Love!
Whoever passes through Your street realises
That indeed from the very door to the terrace of Your house rains l love!
On the Mystical Path
The rosary and the sacred thread are but only a means to an end.
All this piety is conceit and hypocrisy,
How can it be worthy of our Beloved?.
Kingship is easy, acquaint yourself with poverty,
Why should a drop become a pearl when it can transform itself into an ocean?.
Hands soiled with gold begin to stink,
How awful is the plight of the soul soiled with gold!
Day and night you hear of people dying,
You, too, have to die. How strange is your behaviour!.
The more a traveller is unencumbered,
The less he feels worried on his journey.
You, too, are a traveller in this world,
Take this as certain, if you are wakeful.
Drive egoism away from you,
For, like conceit and arrogance, it is also a burden.
So long as you live in this world, be independent,
The Qadri has warned you!
Whoever recognised this, carried the day,
He who lost himself, found Him.
And he who sought Him not within his own self,
Passed away, carrying his quest along with him.
The Qadri found his Beloved within his own self,
Being himself of good disposition, he won the favour of the Good.
To whatever object you may turn your face, He is in view,
Are you blind, for why do you assign Him to yourself?
Dara On The Religious Systems of the Hindus
Among the most noteworthy distinguished Sufi poet that Dara Shikoh was attracted to was Sarmad, a truly remarkable man who was beheaded by Aurangzeb. Indeed, Dara Shikoh seems to have been in the middle of the entire literary, spiritual, and intellectual movement that was to propel Lahore as a centre of a liberal tradition not known in the subcontinent before. His spirit still pervades the way we think, a sort of detached tolerance to every point of view. The execution of Dara by his brother Aurangzeb led to this tradition being badly dented.
Dara Shikoh theater play by Ajoka:
“I’ve never seen this place so quiet on a Thursday,” says Saba Pervaiz, 32, one of the devotees at the shrine of Mian Mir, an influential 17th century Sufi saint.
“Today is unlike 20 years ago or even two years ago,” she adds. “This place used to be packed during Ramazan.”
The number of visitors to Mian Mir and other Sufi shrines in Lahore has plummeted since the twin suicide blasts at Data Darbar that killed 50 people almost two months ago. Consequently, these shrines have been receiving fewer donations.
“We used to get at least 600 people on Thursdays. Now it ranges from 200 to 300,” says Mehmood Alam, who manages security and events at the shrine.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/46595/shrines-feel-repercussions-of-data-darbar-blasts/
During the early to mid-1970s, under the country’s first democratically elected government, headed by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (1972–77), a sense of intellectual openness coincided with the search for national redefinition in the aftermath of the 1971 breakup. During this short half-decade, a greater emphasis on the legitimacy of local ethnic identities—in no small part attributed to Bhutto’s own recognition of Sindh’s unique cultural heritage—resulted in the state creation of institutions such as Lok Virsa (1974) and regional literary boards such as the Pakistan Panjabi Adabi Board. Writers such as Fakhar Zaman, Munnoo Bhai, and Shafqat Tanveer Mirza began to establish themselves in Punjabi.
Mohammad Hanif Ramey, whose work will be engaged later, served as chief minister of the Punjab during the Bhutto years. Yet following General Zia ul-Haq’s military coup in 1977, opportunities to openly write about a “Punjabi identity” (or any other) were curtailed, particularly during the first half of his decade of dictatorship. Poet and fiction writer Fakhar Zaman saw his works banned. (Despite this, they still received attention and circulation: His translator, Khalid Hasan, noted that books such as Band¯ıwa¯ n still circulated because the Pakistani government was not a very efficient censor; Hasan 2003.
http://alyssaayres.com/pdf/Ayres-JAS-Language-Nation.pdf
Hi! This is really a re-imagining of history to suit an anti-Sunni, sectarian worldview. Aurangzeb was no anti-shrine ‘proto-Wahhabi’ like the author imagines him to be (and if the translated passages are really the most extreme examples of Dara Shikoh’s works, they’re not really all that transgressive, in fact the likes of Shaikh Abdullah al-Ansari al-Harawi have said far stranger things). Aurangzeb was in fact quite the shrine builder himself and he was an initiate in a sufi order too.
This whole portrayal of sufis as some sort of “Muslim hippies” is another farce. In general Sufis have been the most strident ones in defending the Deen and upholding the glory and honor of Muslims over the ahl al Dhimma in Muslim states. Thus when Sultan Azam Shah gave official appointments to Hindus it was Maulana Muzaffar Shams Balkhi, a Firdausi, Suhrawardi Sufi, who opposed him and it was a Naqshbandi sufi named Ahmad Sirhindi (Mujaddid Alf Thani) who destroyed the syncretistic religion, created by Akbar.
Lastly there’s really no such thing as a ‘humane culture’ of the shrines. Karo Kari and the likes are enforced by the guardians of the shrine-venerating culture. In the present age graves of pious have become a hotbed of bhang and opium consumption, prostitution, cross-dressing and the likes. Shrines are managed by a parasitical upper class who seem to believe that because their ancestors were pious people, that entitles them to do no work and to live off the work of other people. Certainly we cannot have a productive nation in the presence of such attitudes.
As for the Shi’ites, their beliefs are an offense to any Muslim, Sufi or Wahhabi or whatever. They should stick to taqiyyah if want to get along. Anytime they get uppity and start openly expressing their absurd beliefs in front of the Sunni majority, there’s sure to be a reaction. No living nation can tolerate such people living in their midst.