Question1 : Critically examine the origin of Rajputs ?

Answer -
‘Rajput’ is derivative of a Sanskrit word raj-Putra which means “son of a king”. Rajput was
recognized for their bravery, faithfulness and royalty. They were the warriors who fought in the
battles and took care of the governing functions. The Rajputs originated from western, eastern,
northern India and from some parts of Pakistan. Rajputs enjoyed their eminence during the 6th to
12th centuries. Until 20th century Rajputs ruled in trounce majority in the princely states of
Rajasthan and

Explanation:

ORIGIN:
Recent research suggests that the Rajputs came from a variety of ethnic and geographical
backgrounds. The root word "rajaputra" (literally "son of a king") first appears as a designation
for royal officials in the 11th century Sanskrit inscriptions. According to some scholars, it was
reserved for the immediate relatives of a king; others believe that it was used by a larger group of
high-ranking men. Over time, the derivative term "Rajput" came to denote a hereditary political
status, which was not necessarily very high: the term could denote a wide range of rank-holders,
from an actual son of a king to the lowest-ranked landholder. Before the 15th century, the term
"Rajput" was also associated with people of mixed-caste origin, who were considered inferior in
rank to "Kshatriya".

Gradually, the term Rajput came to denote a social class, which was formed when the various
tribal and nomadic groups became landed aristocrats, and transformed into the ruling class.
These groups assumed the title "Rajput" as part of their claim to higher social positions and
ranks. The early medieval literature suggests that this newly formed Rajput class comprised
people from multiple castes. Thus, the Rajput identity is not the result of a shared ancestry.
Rather, it emerged when different social groups of medieval India sought to legitimize their
newly acquired political power by claiming Kshatriya status. These groups started identifying as
Rajput at different times, in different ways.

The origin of the Rajputs has been a much-debated topic among the historians. Colonial-era
writers characterised them as descendants of the foreign invaders such as the Scythians or the
Hunas, and believed that the Agnikula myth was invented to conceal their foreign origin.
According to this theory, the Rajputs originated when these invaders were assimilated into the
Kshatriya category during the 6th or 7th century, following the collapse of the Gupta Empire.
While many of these colonial writers propagated this foreign-origin theory in order to legitimise
the colonial rule, the theory was also supported by some Indian scholars. The Indian nationalist
historians, believed the Rajputs to be descendants of the ancient Vedic Aryan Kshatriyas. The
third group of historians, which includes Jai Narayan Asopa, theorized that the Rajputs were
Brahmins who became rulers.

Rajput kingdoms:
The Rajput kingdoms were disparate: loyalty to a clan was more important than allegiance to the
wider Rajput social grouping, meaning that one clan would fight another. This and the
internecine jostling for position that took place when a clan leader (raja) died meant that Rajput
politics were fluid and prevented the formation of a coherent Rajput empire.

The first major Rajput kingdom was the Sisodia-ruled kingdom of Mewar. However, the term
"Rajput" has also been used as an anachronistic designation for leading martial lineages of 11th
and 12th centuries that confronted the Ghaznavid and Ghurid invaders such as the Pratiharas, the
Chahamanas (of Shakambhari, Nadol and Jalor), the Tomaras, the Chaulukyas, the Paramaras,
the Gahadavalas, and the Chandelas. Although the Rajput identity did not exist at this time, these
lineages were classified as aristocratic Rajput clans in the later times.

Chittor Fort, built by a dynasty of Sisodia Rajputs, is one of the largest forts in India.

In the 15th century, the Muslim sultans of Malwa and Gujarat put a joint effort to overcome the
Mewar ruler Rana Kumbha but both the sultans were defeated. Subsequently, in 1518 the Rajput
Mewar Kingdom under Rana Sanga achieved a major victory over Sultan Ibrahim Lodhi of Delhi
Sultanate and afterwards Rana's influence extended up to the striking distance of Pilia Khar in
Agra. Accordingly, Rana Sanga came to be the most distinguished indigenous contender for
supremacy but was defeated by the Mughal invader Babur at Battle of Khanwa in 1527.

From as early as the 16th century, Purbiya Rajput soldiers from the eastern regions of Bihar and
Awadh, were recruited as mercenaries for Rajputs in the west, particularly in the Malwa region.
The Rajput had a widespread population almost of the subcontinent particularly in north, west
and central India. Populations were found in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand Himachal
Pradesh, Surashtra, Jammu, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar.

The origin of Rajputs is the topic of argument. Authors, such as V. P. Malik and M. S. Naravane,
considered that the period was not given to any particular community or communal group until
the 6th century A.D, as there is no reference of the period in the historic record. Leaders and
aristocrats from the intruders were called as the Kshatriya in the Hindu caste system, although
others who trailed and helped them — such as the Jats, Ahirs and Gurjars - were ranked as
Shudra. At the similar time, some congenital communities were graded as Rajput. Few examples
of these are the Chandelas, Rathors and Bundelas. Aydogdy Kurbanov says that the integration
was precisely between the Hephthalites, Gurjars, and folks from northwestern India. Though,
some researchers, such as C. V. Vaidya and Gauri Shankar Ojha do not accept these integration
philosophies.

Groupings in Rajputs
Rajputs are divided as vansh and vamsha. The vansh is further divided as Suryavanshi which
denotes “House of Sun” who are descended from Lord Ram, Chandravanshi denoting “House of
Moon” descended from Lord Krishna and the last one Agnivanshi from the “Family of Fire
God”.

Beneath the vansh division there are smaller subdivisions which are kul or shakh (branch),
khamp or khanp (twig) and nak (twig tip). Kul serves as primary identity among Rajputs and
each one of them worship and is protected by their family goddess known as kuldevi.

The Suryavanshi clans are Bais, Chattar, Gaur, Kachwaha, Minhas, Pakhral, Patial, Pundir,
Naru, Rathore and Sisodia. In Chandravanshi we have Bhati, Chandelas, Bhangalia, Chudasama,
Jadauns, Jadeja, Jarral, Katoch, Pahore, Som and Tomaras. Lastly in Agnivanshi we have Bhaal,
Chauhan, Dodiya, Chavda, Mori, Naga, Paramara and Solanki.
Rajput Women
Rajput women were meant to do household work but were also skilled for the war and did not
shy to go into the battleground if there were less number of males in the force. However, if the
king and all their men died in the battle, Rajput women prefer to commit suicide instead of
becoming prisoners to other rulers. This ritual was known as ‘Johar’ and was only practiced by
Rajput woman.

Another famous ruler was Maharana Pratap. He was King of Mewar and was regarded as a
fearless warrior & ingenious strategist, who successfully fought the Mughals & safeguard his
people until his death. Slowly the power of Rajput declined as there was no match for the
supremacy of Mughals.

When the British arrived in India, the Rajput states become colonies which in turn ended the
reign of Rajputs forever. After India’s independence (1947), most of the Rajput states in
Rajputana were merged to form the state of Rajasthan within the Indian union.When the British
arrived in India, the Rajput states become colonies which in turn ended the reign of Rajput
forever.

Earliest and much debated opinion concerning the origin of the Rajputs is that all Rajput families
were the descendants of the Gurjaras and the Guijaras were of foreign origin. Therefore, all
Rajput families were of foreign origin and only, later on, were placed among Indian Kshatriyas
and were called the Rajputs. The adherents of this view argue that we find references to the
Guijaras only after the 6th century when foreigners had penetrated in India.

So, they were not of Indian origin but foreigners. Cunningham described them as the descendants
of the Kushanas. A.M.T. Jackson described that one race called Khajara lived in Arminia in the
4th century. When the Hunas attacked India, Khajaras also entered India and both of them settled
themselves here by the beginning of the 6th century. These Khajaras were called Gurjaras by the
Indians. Kalhana has narrated the events of the reign of Gurjara king, Alkhana who ruled in
Punjab in the 9th century.
A part of Rajputana was called Gurjara-Pradesh in the 9th century while, in the 10th century,
Gujarat was referred to as Gurjara. Therefore, some scholars have described that the Gurjaras
entered India through Afghanistan, settled themselves in different parts of India and were the
ancestors of the Rajputs. A stone-inscription at Rajora of 959 A.D. describes Mathandeo, a
feudal Chief of Vijaypala as Gurjara-Pratihara.

It led to the conclusion that the Pratiharas were also a branch of the Gurjaras. The Chalukyas
gave the name of Gujarat to that particular territory. It meant that the Chalukyas were also the
Gurjaras. Prithviraja Raso also described that the Pratiharas, the Chalukyas, the Parmaras and the
Chauhanas originated out of a sacrificial fire-pit which supported the theory of foreign origin of
the Rajputs.

Therefore, several scholars described that all thirty-two Kulas of the Rajputs originated from the
Gurjaras who were foreigners and, thus, all Rajputs were foreigners and were provided the status
of the Kshatriyas only afterwards.

However, this view has not been accepted by the majority of modern historians. It is not certain
that the Khajaras were called the Gurjaras. Except the Parmaras, rest of the three Rajput Kulas
refused to accept their origin out of sacrificial fire-pit. There is no proof that these four Rajput
clans had blood relations On the contrary, it has been regarded more reliable that the Parmaras
and the Chaulukvas had no relation, whatsoever, within the Gurjaras.

No early Muslim record has mentioned that the Gurjaras were a clan. Rather a particular territory
has been referred to as Gurjara. In India, several families were named on the name of the
territory’ which they inhabited. Therefore, it is more logical to accept that the Pratihara was that
clan which occupied Gurjara-Pradesh.

Arab scholars, Sulaimana and Abu Jaid described Jurj as a state and they used the word jurj for
Gurjara-Pradesh. Therefore, modern historians refused to accept this view that all Rajput Kulas
were the descendants of the Guijaras and as the Guijaras were foreigners so all Rajputs had a
foreign origin.
Tod, in his Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, declared that the Rajputs were of Scythian
origin. He drew parallels between the customs of foreigners like Sakas, Kushanas and Hunas,
etc. and the Rajputs. He expressed that customs like Aswamedha-Yajna, worship of horse and
arms and the status of women in society were similar among these foreigners and the Rajputs and
therefore, declared that the Rajputs were the descendants of these foreigners.

William Brook supported the view of Tod. He contended that many family names of the Rajputs
could be traced back only to the period of invasion of these foreigners and particularly those of
the Hunas and thus justifies the theory of their origin from foreigners.

He said that even the Gurjaras were foreigners who came to India at the time of the invasions of
the Hunas, accepted Hinduism, entered into marriage relations with Indians and, thus, gave birth
to many Rajput families. Afterwards, they tried to establish their lineage from the ancient Solar
or Lunar Kshatriya dynasties.

Dr V.A. Smith supported the same view. He observed that invasions of the Hunas seriously
affected Indian society which brought about many social changes and also established many new
ruling dynasties. Therefore, among the Rajput families many belong to foreigners while many
other belong to lower Kshatriya families.
Question:4 Discuss the religious policy of Akbar with special reference to
Din-i-ilahi.

Answer:
"Religion of God") or Divine Faith was a syncretic religion propounded by the Mughal emperor
Akbar in 1582, intending to merge some of the elements of the religions of his empire, and
thereby reconcile the differences that divided his subjects. ... That inspired him to create the Dīn-
i Ilāhī in 1582.

Explanation:
The Dīn-i Ilāhī (Persian) lit. "Religion of God") or Divine Faith was a syncretic religion
propounded by the Mughal emperor Akbar in 1582, intending to merge some of the elements of
the religions of his empire, and thereby reconcile the differences that divided his subjects.The
elements were primarily drawn from Islam and Hinduism, but some others were also taken from
Christianity, Jainism and Zoroastrianism.

Akbar’s religious policy of harmony, reconciliation, and synthesis among all the religions did not
develop all of a sudden.

Between 1556 and 1562, Akbar remained a staunch Sunni Muslim. He practiced the tenets of
Islam as a devout Muslim—prayed five times a day, kept fast in the holy month of Ramazan and
honored the Ulemas of Islam.

He never hesitated to punish the opponents of Islam. However, gradually his views changed after
1562.

‘Sule Kul’:
According to Dr. Tara Chand, his religion was the product of the synthetic effect of the Vedanta
and Sufism of the age. Akbar was deeply interested in religion and philosophy and listened very
carefully not only to the arguments of the Sufi and Shia divines but also the scholars of other
religions also.
He watched the good men professing different creeds and ‘Sule Kul’ i.e. reconciliation seemed to
him the only solution of developing harmony and friendship among followers of different faiths.
In fact some scholars equate ‘Din-i-Ilahi’ with ‘Sule-Kul’.

Akbar’s ‘Sule-Kul’ or his policy of reconciliation and liberalism in religious matters was greatly
influenced by his Hindu mother, his guardian and tutor Bairam Khan and Abdul Latif
respectively, his contact with philosophers and scholars like Sheikh Mubark and his sons Faizi
and Abdul Fazal, his contact with Rajputs, his contact with other religions and his political
ambition to expand and strengthen his empire with the cooperation of all religions.

Ibadat Khana (House of Worship):

With the help of Shaikh Mubark and his sons Faizi and Abdul Fazal, Akbar collected a big
library of books on history, religion, philosophy and sciences. These were read out and explained
to him by Faizi. The result was that Akbar’s views on religion became very liberal and he wanted
to go deep in religious matters. For this he thought of providing a meeting ground.

In 1575, Akbar established Ibadat Khana at Fatehpur Sikri for the purpose of conducting
religious discussions and debates for a better understanding of deep truth in religion. Akbar
himself took part in these discussions. In the beginning, Mullahs only participated.

Akbar addressed the following words to those assembled for discussion: “My sole object, O.
Mullahs is to ascertain truth, to find out and disclose the principles of genuine religion and to
trace it to the divine origin.”

In due course, exponents of Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Christianity began to be
invited. All the scholars were given due respect. However with the passage of time, Akbar found
that the debates in the Ibadat Khana were not helpful in leading to better understanding between
different religions, rather they created bitterness. Hence in 1582, he discontinued the debates.

Development of Akbar’s religious views and measures taken (in the chronological order):
Akbar stopped the practice of converting the prisoners of war to Islam (1562)

He abolished the pilgrimage tax (1563)

He abolished Jizya — a tax levied on Hindus (1564) He established the Ibadat Khana or House
of Worship (1575)

He issued Infallibility Decree (1579)

He founded a new religion called Din-i-Ilahi (1581)

He forbade the killing of animals on certain days (1583)

Infallibility Decree (1579):

Akbar was in favour of weakening the powers of the Ulemas/Mullahs. He wanted to combine in
himself both political and spiritual powers. According to the Decree, Akbar became the supreme
arbiter in civil and religious affairs. This declaration was signed by leading divines. Akbar
himself began to read the Khutba (earlier read by the Imam of the Mosque) from the pulpit of a
Fatehpuri Mosque.

‘Din-i-Ilahi’ or ‘Tauhld-Ilahi’:
After acquainted himself thoroughly with the principles and practises of different religions
through listening to the debates and discussions of religious philosophers and scholars and
watching their lives, Akbar founded a new religion in 1581 which included the virtues of other
religions and he named it Din-i-Ilahi. Akbar tried to emphasise the ‘Sule Kul’ i.e. peace and
harmony among religions.

Important principles of Din-i-Ilahi:

Some of the important principles of Din-i-Ilahi were:
1. God is great. He is One.

2. Akbar is His apostle or representative.

3. Every adherent of this faith should be willing to give away property, life, religion and honour
to the emperor.

4. Every member should take an oath of doing good to everybody.

5. No member should have blind faith.

6. The followers of this faith should not approve of child marriage as well as old marriage.

7. All should show respect to all religions.

8. Whenever the followers of this faith meet, one should say: Allah- hu-Akbar (God is great) and
in reply the other should say Jalla-Jallah – hu (God is beautiful and merciful).

9. As far as possible, the followers of this religion should not eat meat.

10. The followers should not sleep with minor girls.

11. Every member should arrange a feast at his birth day and give charity.

Membership of the Din-i-Ilahi:

The number of the followers of the Din-i-Ilahi was not large. Probably it was a few thousands
only. Among the nobles, only eighteen are said to have accepted this faith. Shaikh Mubark, his
two sons Faizi and Abul Fazl and Raja Birbal embraced the new faith. Akbar did not force
anyone to accept Din-i-Ilahi. It was sad and unfortunate that the new faith died with Akbar’s
death.

Evaluation of Din-i-Ilahi:
Critics of Din-i-Ilahi: Monuments of Akbar’s folly. Budauni regards the founding of Din-i-Ilahi
as an un-Islamic act. Dr. Smith writes, “The whole scheme was the outcome of ridiculous vanity,
monstrous growth of unrestrained autocracy – a monument of Akbar’s folly, not of his wisdom.”
He further calls it “a silly invention”.

Admirers of Din-i-Ilahi:
According to S R. Sharma, Din-i-Ilahi was the crowning expression of Akbar’s nationalism. Dr.
Ishwari Prasad regards it very rational containing good points of all religions. Havell thinks that
with the new faith Akbar won an imperishable name in Indian history.
Lane-poole has justly observed, “The broad minded sympathy which inspired such a vision of
catholicity left a lasting impression upon a land of warring creeds and tribes and for a brief while
created a nation where before there had been only factions”.

According to S.M. Zaffar, “The wisdom of Akbar’s assumption of the prophetic role may be
called in question but the noble ideal that prompted it deserves high praise and not
condemnation. To achieve the aim of unification of India and consolidation of Mughal Empire, it
was necessary first to conquer and then to command sincere devotion from all and sundry by
granting them the freedom of worship and the liberty of conscience. Therefore, Akbar gave up
such a religious code-in essence a political document—as would commend itself to the whole
population”.

The Divine Faith had far-reaching consequences. It totally changed the character of Muslim rule
in India. Malleson has also felt, “Akbar’s foremost aim was the union of Hindustan under one
head which was difficult to achieve had he persecuted all non-Islamic religions. To accomplish
such a union it was necessary, first to conquer, Secondly, to respect all consciences, and all
methods of worshipping Almighty

Din-e Ilahi is best viewed as a state religion with the emperor himself at its center. As the single
authority on all religious matters, Akbar was not only going to interpret and apply the religious
law, but to actually make it. In the end, the new faith had more to do with politics than with
religion. Din-e Ilahi was his solution to the thorny problem of how a Muslim ruler could govern
a predominantly Hindu state. Yet the Din-e Ilahi was fiercely opposed by many Muslims clerics
who declared it a heretical doctrine. Although the new religion did not survive its founder, it
triggered a strong fundamentalist reaction among India’s Muslims. According to rumors, the
Muslim call to prayer, “Allahu akbar,” meaning “God is great,” was interpreted by Akbar
himself as “God is Akbar.”

Akbar is recorded by various conflicting sources as having affirmed allegiance to Islām and as
having broken with Islām. His religion was generally regarded by his contemporaries as a
Muslim innovation or a heretical doctrine; only two sources from his own time—both hostile—
accuse him of trying to found a new religion. The influence and appeal of the Dīn-i Ilāhī were
limited and did not survive Akbar, but they did trigger a strong orthodox reaction in Indian
Islām.