who,propet p.

IIl, isand Indian

required Vol. :
sociopolitical
is
what
medieval
(Akbarnama, :
Mughal
is chambers
counsellor
andof of
history
account
private Fazl
flattery. works
independent
on Administration
and of
in mixture
represent

-Abul
the thecomprehe
awithin
place
Views Ruler
An
wisdom.
will
any prominent
without providea
Syncretism interest,
ldeal
Administration
and
Governance receivetime a
own occupies
also
and
Fazl: ReligiousPoints
Sovereignty for
Discussion
always
his
the
for
to
chapter
would
OUTLINE State
Conception
of of who
Sumit
Mukerji not consideration chapter
Sketch
Life
The does Guide thisFazl
Reader's
Introduction and
Abul CHAPTER
Conclusion
Kingship, Summary
Religion
nature of AbulThis
purpose
of thought.
without
Man's
Tideas
he
structu
state
 Administration 193
Abul Fazl: Views on Governance and

Introduction

In the history of medieval politicalthought, Abul Fazl occupies an eminent place. Just as Ziauddin Barani
provided an exhaustive account of the state system, governance and administration of the Delhi
Svltanate, Abul Fazl produced a detailed and incisive study of the Mughal state and Barani.
machinery o
It was
administration. His work was more authentic and well documented than that of
intellectually more organized and based ona new methodology which he sought toapply in practice. His
of
interpretation of history was integrally linked to the political, social, economic and religious realities
the period. Abul Fazl was a champion of rational thinking and his appeal to reason was visualized as a
bulwark against religious and cultural traditions which threatened to stymie freedom of thought. At the
beginning of the Mughal period, India was divided into many small kingdoms which proved to be a
Lodi in the first Battle of
source of chronic instability. This ended with the victory of Babar over Ibrahim
integrated empire with
Panipat in 1526. The Mughals conquered a large chunk of India and established an
of governance and
a hierarchical administrative structure, strong monetary policies, centralized system
culture incorporating
new methods of military organization. This created an integrated, syncretic and Sufi movements
Bhakti
elements from both Hindu and Muslim thought derived from the legacy of
others and that God can be found without
which transmitted the message that no religion is inferior to
postulated the basic equality of human
blindand dogmatic adherence to superstitions. They further
beings and the gospel of unity and equality in all religions.of Mughal emperor Akbar. His magnum opus
Abul Fazl was acourtier, historian and also a friend end
Nama and Ain-i-Akbaritogether constitute his most authentic work which he finished by the
Akbar
the 16th century. It represented a significant departure from the contemporary historiography
of
moorings and constructing an alternative teleology of universal history where
demolishing its Islamic but of Adam himself, the first human being
Prophet Muhammad and Caliphs
Akbar is the heir not of powerful sovereign and a centralized state
the symbol of a
and is the ruler of all humanity. He is thusNama The second
Akbar contains an account of Akbar's ancestors.
structure. The first part of the book work
account of Akbar's reign up to the 46th year in chronological sequence. The
part gives a detailed
completed in 1602 after five revisions. The Ain-i-Akbari, the third part of
was undertaken in 1595 and administration and control over the various
departments
compilation of the system of resources,
the book, is a information on the extent, population,
a veritable mine of
of government. It provides account of the religious and philosophical system of the
wealth as well as an
condition, industry and practices. No medieval historian before him had tried to
and
Hindus and also their social customs such a wide canvas. Abul Fazl's work is thus
considered
of his age in
recapture the historical developments Mughal system of administration and state structure.
of the
the most comprehensive account secular methodology which he applied not only to collect facts but
Abul Fazl adopted a rational and critical investigation. After amassing a huge quantum of facts,
also to articulate them on the basis of presented them clearly and systematically. He never took any
and
he selected the important ones by ascertaining whether it measured up to the principles
of
source on trust and verified its
validity
He thus produced a new Philosophy of History that is a definite
historicalenguiry formulated by him. history, principles tor its interpretation and the critical
of
concept of the nature and purpose selection of the facts of history. Like a genuine historian, Abul
Fazl
and
cquipment for the collection He did not limit himselfto a single source to ascertain afact but
sources. Thereafter., he subjected them to critical scrutiny
assigned priority to original possible.
versions of the same asconsisted of accounts of events written by eye witnesses.
obtained as many material
before acceptance. His source
194 SUMIT MUKERJI

Farmans and other records were also duly consulted. It is remarkaLy

Reports, memoranda, imperial a methodology conducive to the verification of th.
how in those distant times Abul Fazl evolved
It is of enduring relevance to researchers in present-day India who o
authenticity of conclusions.
take a leaf out of Abul Fazl's book.

The Life Sketch

Nagauri, a reputed Islamic scholar and the
Abul Fazl (1551-1603) was the second son of ShaikhMubarak
younger brother of poet Faizi. Abul Fazl was born in Agra when the MughalAbul Empire was yet to be regained
his father, Fazl could read and write
by Humayun who had been driven out by Sher Shah. Trained by learning before he reached the
Arabicby the time he was 5 years of age and memorized all conventional
quote his Own words, 'At
age of 10. Thisclearly testifies that he was extraordinarily gifted and talented. To
acquired an
a little over one year I had the miraculous gift of fluent speech and at five years of age I had
unusual stock of information and could both read and write. This clearly proves that he was a Wonder
Child. Noted for his erudition by the time he had reached 20, he developed asingular capacity of provid1ng
new interpretations to old problems. Although Abul Fazl grew up in the capital during the period when
Akbar was re-establishing Mughal authority in north India, he was not initially attracted to court service,
as had been his older brother Faizi, Akbar's famous poet-laureate. Instead, he applied himself to rigorous
life of study, and by the age of 15 he had extensively read Arabic, Greek philosophy and Sufism. His
precociousness seems to have made him something of a social misfit, however, and by the time that he
was 20 he had already embarked on a life of ascetic withdrawal which was unusual for his age.
Meanwhil, the leading members of theMughal 'Ulema' were mounting an intense campaign against
Shaikh Mobrak, because the latter had publicly defended a member of the Mahdawi sect. In 977/1569
70Abul Fazl stirred ahornet's nest by challenging in public the opinions of one of the leading Ulemas.
The atmosphere at court became tense. Shaikh Mobrak, accused of being a Mahdawi and a Shia
himself, was driven with his family from home to home seeking refuge. For a while he lived in Delhi.
The events surrounding his father's persecution made a profound impression on Abul Fazl; he devoted
a major part of his autobiography to describing these traumatic experiences, and he dedicated his
subsequent career to exposing what he considered the narrow-minded bigotry of the Ulema. In
981/1574 Abul Fazl made his first appearance in Akbar's court. He favourably impressed the emperor
and soon thereafter entered court service.
His reputation for forming his independent judgements based on his own observations came in for
much opprobrium, particularly from his peers who were accustomed to taglid or blind emulation.
His mindset was objective and free from bias which was conducive to
dispassionate history writing. Hs
refusal to be browbeaten by authority prompted him to publicly refute a powerful Alim in the Mughd
court which enraged him so much that he started a vendetta campaign against Abul
Fazl and his fathel.
Abul Fazl rose to prominence in the court of Akbar where he was introduced in the
theological debates
that took place in the Ibadatkhana at Fatehpur Sikri during 1576-1578. Chanpioning a more liberal
brandof Islam he outwitted most of the Ulemas in court. Soon the nature of the Muehal
polity underwent
asignificant change and the body politic was radically transtormed so as to produce a redefinition of
Mughal political culture which persisted for more than a century. Akbar abolished the Jizyah tax much
to the chagrin of the Ulemas and soon promulgated the doctrine of Suhl-i-Kul to emancipate himself
from the control of the Ulemas. This is largely attributed to the influence of Abul Fazl. Abul Fazl
troncated the Bible and also the Panchatantra in Persian and wrote an introduction to the Persiat
 Abul Fazl: Views on Governance and Administration 195
translation of
who had Mahbhârata. Because of his intimacy with Akbar he was inthe bad books of his son Salim
assassinated him in
Moreover, Abul Fazl had opposed1603Salims
apprehending that he was inciting hatred in the mind of Akbar.
accession.

Conception of State
Abul Fazl detined the state in the
context of the
warriors, artificers and merchants, the learned that needs of society. He
is thbe religious classescategorized human beings into
and finally the labourers and like the Brhmans and Ulemas
husbandmen. He relegated this class to the third position, thereby striking
at the root of their self-opinionated
the learned ahead of the merchants but pretensions. Jalaluddin Dawwani, whoinfluenced Abul Fazl, placed
below the warriors. He classified human beings into
and intermediate. The nobles possessed noble, base
intellect, sagacity, administrative capacity, eloquence and
courage for military duty. The other two classes were self-centred. Abul
Fazl's view of the base or
ignoble classes reflected the prejudices of the contemporary upper
belonging to the lower order of society should not aspire for a share in state classes. It implied that those
should be the exclusive preserve of those belonging to the noble families and upper power and administration
evil sections justified royal despotism, for only a king who possessed the castes. Prevalence of
control these sections. He had to necessary qualities could
ensure social stability by preventing sectarian strife and he was also
duty bound to put each section in its proper place. Stability and even dignity meant the maintenance of
one's due station in life. Akbar was of the opinion that when a menial takes to learning, it is at the
expense
of one's duty. Here one can clearly hear reverberations of Plato and Bradley who were of the opinion that
each person should specialize in his allotted station of life. According to Abul Fazl, the noblest souls are
those pledging absolute, unquestioning loyalty to Emperor Akbar. Just below them are those whose
loyalty is commensurate with tangible gain. The worst are those who are disloyal and rebellious.
Abul Fazl compares the body politic to a living organism. Just as the equilibrium in any animal
constitution depends on the balance between the four elements of fire, water, air and earth, similarly
equilibrium in the body politic ismaintained by a judicious division of ranks; each rank contributing to
the prosperity of the whole. If any rank transgresses its functions, the equilibrium isupset. At the apex
of the administrative hierarchy, there is the nuwinan-i-dawlat who comprises the highest nobility whose
devotion illuminates the battlefield. They resemble the element of fire. Next comes the auliya-i-nusrat
that is the revenue officials who resembles the wind enabling the administration to breathe. This is
followed by ashab-i-suhhat or advisors of the king who represent water. Perceptive, experienced and well
versed about human nature, they irrigate the body politic with their moderate views contributing to
world prosperity. Conversely, they inundate the world with deluge and calamity. In the tourth categnry
are the personalattendants of the king resembling carth. If they are free trom dross, theyofcan be like elixir
administration
but otherwise they can be like dust in the face of success. To Abul Fazl, the efficiency
(Fazl 1897a, 9).
depended upon the coordination of the four elements

Kingship, Sovereignty and Ideal Ruler

established
Abul Fazl was categorical on the point that the term Badshahat signified a powerful,
owner whom none can eliminate. The Badshah was the supreme superior in the empire, the complete
Fazl, 'Badshahat is the
repository of social, economic, political and juridical powers. ln the words ofAbul
196 SUMIT MUKERJI
himself. God throws his kindness on Badshah who
light derived from God which has been sent by God
signified a continuation of the legacy of the Delhi
works as the agent of God' (Fazl 1897b, 255). This representatives of God on earth. Abul Fazl was of
Sultanatewhere rulers like Balban projected them as
the father of his subjects whom he should treat
the decided view that a Badslhah must consider himself
cffort to ensure the welfare of his subjects and take
as his children. It was thus his effort to make every
religious, political and so on. He should treat his
care of every aspect of their life-economic, social,
peaceand harmony in the empire (ibid., 255). It is known from Abul Fazl that
people equally to ensure
Badshah over all other elements of the
Akbar made it a point toestablish the overriding authority of the
him the authority to interpret
state. In l1579, he promulgated a decree called Mazhar which conferred on
position of King of Islam. Abul Fazl
law. However, he was not satisfied with this and lost interest in the
Sovereignty was
impressed on him the idea of the king being an agent of God who worked on his behalf.
the shadow of God (Zilli
a divine light (farr-i-izidi)which replaced the traditional concept of King as authority
Ilahi) (Athar 2006, 125). The Sultanate theory of Kingship viewed the ruler as an intermediate
between the Rasul Allah (messenger of God) and Khilafatal-Rasul (deputy of the Prophet that is the
Caliph) on the one hand and the Umrah on the other. The Sultan's authority was conditional upon his
satisfactory performance as the amir al-mominin that is leader of the faithful in defence and promotion
of his faith. Allegiance is thus not automatic and is retractable. Abul Fazl, however, was categorical on
the point that a ruler endowed with farr-i-izidi does not need the intermediate assistance of anyone and
men in his presence, bend in submission (Fazl l897b, 255). At the same time, while the Badshah wielded
absolute power and the people were duty bound to obey his orders, yet Abul Fazl was of the opinion that
if the Emperor discriminated on the basis of caste, religion, class, etc., he could not be considered agood
king. Allrulers are not necessarily endowed with farr-i-izidi by the mere fact of their holding authority
Political power is characterized by alarge treasury, aconsiderable military force, wise counsellors. loyal
followers and skilful workmen. Selfish rulers enjoy control over these temporarily while the rightful ones
enjoy them all through. They consecrate themselves to the mission of suppressing cruelty and promoting
the well-being of the people (ibid., 255). The selfish ones, in contrast, are obsessed with the external
forms of power that feed their vanity. This leads to insecurity, strifeand oppression. Providing a rationale
for royal Omni competence, Abul Fazl says that

No dignity is higher in the eyes of God than royalty and those who are wise, drink from its auspicious
fountain. Royalty is a remedy for the spirit of rebellion and the reason why the subjects obey. If royalty
didnot exist, the storm of strife would never subside nor selfish ambitions disappear. Mankind, being
under the burden of lawlessness and Iust, would sink into the it of destruction; this world this great
market place would lose its prosperity, and the whole world becomes a barren waste. (Embree 1992, 425)
Abul Fazl uses the analogy of bride for the world and bridegroom for the ruler and says that the world
becomes the worshipper of the king In this way he elevates the king to the highest pedestal. He, howevet.
adds perceptively that silly and short-sighted men cannot distinguish between a true king trom aseltish
one as both have in conmmon, a large treasury, a numerous arny, an abundance of wise men, a multitude
of skilful workmen and asuperfluity of means of enjoynent. However, men with deeper insight, note the
difference. In the case of the former, the aforesaid advantages are lasting but in the case of the latter they
are transitory. This is because the former is detached fron these things and his objective is to renove
oppression and ensure common good. "The latter is aprisoner of the external forms of roval power.
vanity, slavishness of man, etc. Royalty is a light emanating from God just like a ray from the sun. It is
the illuminator of the universe, the receptacle of all virtues. This divine light is comnnunicated by God to
 AbuT Fazl: Views on Governance and Administration 197
kings without the intermediate
lovetowards the
assistance of anvone The aualities which flow from it are
subjects. With his ripened wisdom the king can first, a paternal
plans accordingly. Second, the king is judge the spirit of the age and shape his
large-hearted.
him. His divine firmness gives him the power of The sight of anything disagreeable does not unsettie
and their claims are metwithout delay. Third, he requital, The wishes of great and small are
has an everlasting trust in God and when he attended to
action, he considers God as the doer and himself as his
medium, pertorms an
devotion. The success of his plans willnot make him complacent and Finally. he is committed to prayer and
God and repose his trust in man. He puts his desires in the reins of adversity will not make him torget
be trodden down by restlessness. He makes wrath the reason and never permits himself to
tyrant pay homage to wisdom, so that blind rage
does not overpower him. He sits on the eminence of
propriety, so that those who have gone astray have
achance to return without their evil deeds being exposed in
public. He endeavours to promote the
happiness of allcreatures in obedience to the will of God but never seeks to please anyone in contradiction
to reason. He is essentially a truth seeker (ibid. 1992,426-427). It is clear from this that the ideal king to
Abul Fazl is a truly enlightened man comparable in some respect to Plato's Philosopher King whowith
his ripened wisdom is best fitted to rule the society. In making his case for the ideal ruler who works only
for the highest perfection of happiness, Abul Fazl followed the footsteps of A-Farabi, but unlike him, he
did not speak of the happiness of Sunni Musims alone and instead included all people regardless of their
sect. In his opinion, the ideal ruler is not merely one who adheres to the Shariat to be on the rightpath
but he is rather an Insan al-Kamin or Perfect Man capable of observing the connection between spiritual
and temporal things and preserving both of these high matters in their proper place. He does not totally
ignore the Shariat but is at liberty to disregard it if it jeopardizes the welfare and happiness of his
subjects (Rizvi 1975, 356). This was not only a radical but almost revolutionary proposition. Abul Fazl
was of the decided view that kingship was a gift of God. Neither lineage nor access to resources or
support of the people makes a sovereign. The ideal ruler must possess qualities like magnanimity,
benevolence, endurance, exalted understanding, innate graciousness, natural courage, rectitude, justice,
etc. If the monarch is not sufficiently
proper conduct, thoughtfulness, willingness to overlook the trivial,
1897b, 289). It may be noted here that the
wise to overpower desires, he is not fit for his lofty office (Fazl
of exalted kingship. Here, we can
aforesaid view of good kingship largely resembles the Buddhist view
medieval thought.
discern a continuity and convergence of ancient and rule, Abul Fazl says that this in the nature of
Enunciating the concept of Jahanbani or world
behalf of the creator who bestows that sovereign authority whom the ideal ruler
guardianship on
restoring peace and stability. A true ruler always prevails over any force that
WOrships by preserving or A great fire cannot be extinguished by a little water and
Challenges the peace and stability of the empire.
undone by their own evil deeds. According to Abul Fazl, military
evil doers and mischief makers are
uprooting all dissension and obstreperous elements. This is like
action and expansion are inevitable for clearing of weeds in a garden (ibid., 122). Abul Fazl also focuses
on
comparable to
acleansing operation
which he does not define in terms of Islam. Following the paradigm of Akhlag-i
the concept of Justice universal justice. To him, toresight, reason and forbearance were the
Nasiri, he advocates the notion of motivated by
broad-based justice. Rulers rich in these qualities could never be mtters of
essential attributes of distinguish between friends and strangers in
and would never of universal
larrow personal considerations stand that a sovereign whodid not uphold the gospel kingship
Justice. Abul Fazl took the irrevocable
the same light was not worthy of the exalted dignity of naive
in
Peace and did not regard all sects equality of treatment for all, Abul Fazl did not make the there
advocating Emperor into five heads. First,
(KIzvi 1975, 364). While He classified subjects of the
dSSumption that all people were alike.
198 SUMIT MUKERJI
was most
what was proper and necessary and suitable for
consultation in state affairs.
were the commendable menSecond, thereonlywerethe men of good intentions who were themselves.of good
who did
conduct for the other people. Third, there
those
conductwho were neither good nor evil who should be encouraged to do good. Fourth, there were
but were less reliable in advising what was right were

were themselves evil but did not harm others. They should be subjected to good
inconsiderate men who vicious ones whose evil spread like contagion who
counselling and severe rebuke. Finally, there werethe he should be banished from his house. Jf even
does not work,
should be isolated from the rest. If that have his limbs amputated as a deterrent rather L
then he should be blinded or
does not pay off, retributive. Just as the gardener extirpates badtrees and
retribution.Thus, Justice was corrective and not
branches, in the same way just and far sighted kings light the lamp of wisdom ko
chops off some
regulating and instructing their servants (Fazl 1897b,authority323).
in governance, administration, agriculture
In theera of the Sultanate, the king was the final
education and other fields but he had no say in the sphereImam-1-Adil of religion. Akbar, however, arrogated to
in religious disputes vis-a-vis because he followed the order
himself the power to arbitrate
the ideal king who could do no wrong. In
of God and was thus infallible.Abul Fazl eulogized Akbar as
welfare of the people. He was
Akbarnama, Abul Fazl mentioned that Akbar always worked for the
ensured both stability and good
imbued with tolerance, broadmindedness and a sense of justice. He
safety. He also provided a
governance to the Mughal state along with economic prosperity, peace and
moral justification for Akbar's policy of imperialist expansionism.

Administration and Governance

Abul Fazl was born at a time when the Mughal Empire was yet to be re-established by Humayun.
Humayun did not have the time to revise the old administration and it was Akbar who gave it a structure
of government and administration more or less along lines of the Delhi Sultanate. The question is what
was innovative which made the Mughal Empire stronger? Astrong and wellplanned administrate
structure is the key to good governance as well as welfare and peace and is also the surest guaranis
against attack by an enemy. This would have been impossible to achieve without loyal and intelige
the Delhi
officers and an efficient armny. The Mughal polity was not a continuation of the legacy of
Sultanate as Akbar changed the designation of the officers and developed a provincial administrati
for better
patterned on the central system of governnment. Elaborate rules and regulations were framed
should
control. Abul Fazl in his views on administration, assigned priority to advocates who he said,
inthe
possess qualities necessary to solve the problenms of the king, both public and private. Just as Allot
Artha[stra, the state was divided into many levels and each level had officers of various kinds. were
them were responsible for the administration of the state and directly answerable to the ruler annd
thus compulsively committed to the betterment of the condition of the people. Akbar divided his enpire
controlled by
into Sarkars and Mahalls. He established a chain of ministers at various levels who were
not
ministers at the centre. The system was thoroughly secular, and officers could
the religion of the Systematize his
interfere with administrative work. Akbar left no stone unturned to centralize and
administration. There were small landlords under the king who were called Jagirdars.The
some
Zamindars or got
King often used their forces to curb other chieftains. There was also a class called Bhumia w hisland
land from the Jagirdars. They were owners of lahd and did not have to pay any duty torit, but under
was inferior to that of Jagirdars. There was also Khalsal and in the vicinity of whichwas
the capital
 Abul Fazl: VieWs on Governance and Administration 199
the direct control of the king. The Mughals did
the Sultanate because the landlords kept the not disturb this system which prevailed from the days of
(Mehta 1996, 149). lands with those who were allied with the king of Delhi
The Mughai state was based on a centralized atrimonial system
borrowed from the where ranks and hierarchies
Mansabdari
System of Persia were bestowed. Fach rank had two parts, zat and sawar.
The forner meant rights andthe latter
meant a force of horses to command. Sixty-six ranks were enistea
by Abul Fazl in Ain-i-Akbari. Gifts were granted to the
deserving and each Mansabdar reported
tothe ruler. They collected revenue on
behalf of the ruler and received salary in cash. Abul directiy
referred to three Mansabs who had 500 and above, 400-200 and Fazi nas
150-10 Mansabs. It created a military
hierarchy which was like a status symbol (Fazl 1897a, 250).
maintained by Mansabdars. Monsterat testified in 1581 that thereAkbar had a strong army Wncn was
were 45,000 cavalries, 5,000 elephants
and many thousands of infantries all paid directly from the royal treasury
(Chandra 2007, 162-165).
While Abul Fazl was a believer in hierarchy, he was also concerned about the need for talent irrespective
of social background. Akbar was acutely conscious of this and promoted common soldiers to the
of Grandee on the basis of talent. The Mughals did not interfere with the caste system and left
dignity
the basic framework of the Indian society. Abul Fazl wanted Hindus and Muslims to co-existunchanged,
peacefully
but found that the Hindus remained isolated and very few of their matters came up in court. The
Panchayat and caste courtswere there and the Zamindar enjoyed a paternal image.
As regards Land Revenue system, Akbar divided all provinces into Sarkars and Parganas. Each Sarkar
was divided into a number of Parganas. Therewas a Shigdar and Amil for the collection of revenue and
there were posts of treasurer, Qanungo, etc. A large group of people was entrusted with looking after
production that is the produce at the time of harvest and the state's share in it. Dashsala or a 10-year
system was the basis of Akbar's revenue policy which was the logical culmination of the system
introduced by Sher Shah. The productivity and local prices during the ast 10 years were averaged in cash
on the basis of information. Land revenue was the heaviest demand on peasants, and they were under
constant threat of penal action. Unlike collection of tax on collective basis, Akbar collected tax from the
farmer based on his individual harvest. Earlier the farmer had to pay the tax irrespective of whether
the benefit of the farmer
he had a good harvest. The system of Akbar did not however redound to
them even
because they were exploited by the collecting authorities like landlords who did not spare
against
during natural calamities in violation of Akbar's directive. Akbar thus took preventive measures able to
the exploiters. He was
this exploitation of farmers. He kept a watch on the landlords to identify
However, it was not possible for
return the money to the farmers who had been forced to pay the tax.147, 157).
exploitation remained (ibid.,
nm to monitor the system entirely and

Religion and Religious Syncretism

ablind supporter of Islam. He was in tavour of participation of the Hindus in
ADul Fazl was never composite culture and contended that the Hindus
administration. He was a votary of
gOvernance and monotheisn but Muslims because of their ignorance of
like subscribed to the doctrine of believed in the superiority of Islam
Muslims,
CTiptures, misunderstood them. Unlike Barani, Abul Fazl never
was maligned as Kafir, Hindu and Agnipujak (Hassan 1983, 129). His
over other religions. Thus, he
the equality and fraternity of all religions and based on the doctrine of
outlook was secular espousing an intellectual with catholicity of outlook
who was asworn enemy
Suhl-i-Kul or universal peace. He was
200 SUMIT MUKERJI
if traditions were sacrosanct then why De.
Muhammed of all persons wentcounterpoint
for newthoughts. that
was To him, changes inlaw and religion must be initiated
Of dogmatic orthodoxy. His
modern outlook was reflected in
believing Akbar's
His refreshingly
attuned to the requirements of the age. to the doctrine of Suhl-i-Kul from the
adhered
doctrine of Din-e llhi. Abul Fazl assiduously of God could not discriminate between various faiths
core of his heart that the king who was the agent Sovereignty was not limited to any particular f
desideratunn.
Adoctrine justifying tolerance was the their paths diverged. Abul Fazl thus did not subscribe to
same in essence, only that in a
as all religions were
overarching sovereignty of Islam. He was of the decided view
Barani's plea for the sovereignty was more relevant. Thus, he supported Akha
religious country like India, monarchical wt
attitude, wanted to create a Hindustan which could stand out in the world
who with his rationalist Akbar needed to end the monopoly of tha
quest for a more inclusive order,
greater confidence. In his the limits of the Islamic order. Abul Fazl Drovid:
incumbent Muslim elite without transgressing
the theoretical foundation for this mission.
constituted the Islamic order. He contended tha:
AbulFazl addressed the seminal question as to what
laws of Islam, yet there was no rigid
while the benchmark of the former was the enforcement of the
interpretations and there was no monolithic
consensus on Islamic law. The Quran was open to multiple
regulate human behaviour in such a
Shariat which had to be upheld everywhere. Laws were meant to
leading to God. Whether
manner that man remained on the Sirat al-Mustaqim that is the straight path
individual law but the criteria were
an order was Islanic or not, depended not on the enforcement of any
emanated from the
its conformity to the essence of Islam. Abul Fazl's understanding of the Islamicorder
transcendentalist theory of Wahdat al-Wujud or unity of being developed in the 12th century by the
Andalusian philosopher Ibn al-Arabi. According to it, the Khaliq or the Creator and Khalq or creation.
were not distinct entities but the divine element pervades all creation and there is no being who is not a
part of the higher being. According to Abul Fazl, Khair-i-Mahaz or pure good was the essence of divine
majesty and absolute goodness permeates his entire creation. To him, a good life did not simply consist
of prayer and invocation but demanded an attitude of service to the whole of mankind rising above
sectarian differences (Chatterjee 2016, 96).
Abul Fazl justified Akbar's abolition of the hated Jizyah tax saying that the Hinduswere equaly lod
having bound up the waist of devotion and service and exerted themselves for the advancement otthe
dominion.This action was motivated to strike at the root of the aspiration of Ulemas for predominante
(Chandra 2007, 168). Commenting on the religious debates which took place in Akbars lbadatkhai.
Abul Fazlsays that it served one purpose, that is to publicly demonstrate the bigotry of the Ulemus (ibt.
177). Abul Fazl related Akbar's Din-e Ilãhi with the concept of the Emperor as the spiritual guide ofthe
people. He identified two tendencies of man, one class inclinedtowards Din that is religion and the other
to worldly thoughts that is duniya. It is necessary to find a common ground between the two taking
account the all-encompassing nature of God. It was necessary to check blood thirsty fanatics who
superficially resembled human beings. If anyone mustered courage to openly proclain hisenlightened
thoughts, these elements would immediately think of heresy and atheism and contemplate his murdet.
Faced with this menace, the people would naturally lookto the king on account of his high ppositionand
accept him as their spiritual leader as well. Abul Fazl quotes two sayings of Akbar in this connection. by
guidance is not meant indication of the road, not the gathering together of disciples. To makea disciple
is to instruct him in the service of God, not to make him a personal attendant (ibid., 180). Akbarsliberal
outlook incurred scornful reaction from orthodox people like Badauni who even went totheextentof
the
alleging that because of such abuses of Islam, many disgust.In
Muslims were leavingthe country in
 Abul Fazl: Views on Governance and Administration 201
face of such virulent diatribe, Abul Fazl
ruler whose instruments of control were steadfastly defended Akbar by projecting him as a benevolent
for decades through the aid of heaven. favour and affection. He was a righteous ruler who had ruled
religionto glorify and fortify the Thus, while steering clear of religious dogmatism, Abul Fazl used
him as a recipient of divine ideological foundations of the MughalIstate under Akbar by representing
from all traces of religious benediction. In this sense, his
secular outlook was not irreligious but was free
narrownmess. Perhaps there was
hecause like Machiavelli who separated the domain ofthe an incipient Machiavellian element nere
nolitics from that of religion, advocated that
religion could be used to augment the power of the state, Abul
divine sanction. Fazl toodeified Akbar using the Idea or

Conclusion
The political thought of Abul Fazl championed the integration of Hindus and Muslims in the empire of
Akbar. In articulating the imperial ideology, Abul Fazl refused to step intothe shoes of his predecessors.
He did not emphasize on the sacrosanctity of the Shariat but at the same time did not compromiseon
the basic principles of the Islamic order. He provided an Islamic rationale for equal treatment of Muslims
and non-Muslims in the polity therelby laying the foundation of a political dispensation where religious
affiliation was secondary to the political allegiance of the subject. This new political culture characterized
by catholicity of outlook, endured almost till the modern period. While the principle of equality was not
always honoured by the Mughal state, yet Abul Fazl delineated the contours of apolitical ideology where
discrimination on the basis of sectarian identity was absent. One main reason behind his affinity to
Akbar was his freedom from religious bias which suited Akbar's own inclination. Abul Fazl was
justice the
essentially a secular rationalist as apparent from his conviction that 'He is a man who makes
reason. Benoy Sarkar has
guide of the path of inquiry and takes from every sect, what is consonant to
and sought to remove strife and
stated that Abul Fazl was the precursor of Raja Ram Mohan Roy
peacemaker. His logic was unchallengeable
animosity amongdiverse races. He was a bridge builder and
Megasthenes to Nivedita has flattered the Hindus
In theory and fruitful in practice. Perhaps no one from Hindu-Muslim
so dignified a manner. He was truly speaking one of the first creative specimens of
In Muslim mind through the enfranchisement of the
fusion. It was he who tried to emancipate the
cultural
Christian mind by the Renaissance which was to attack the Hindu mind
Intelligenceconsummated in the
through Ram Mohan (Sarkar 1935).
WO centuries later in and of objectivity as his sole purpose was toglority Akba.
rightly criticized for his lack
Abul Fazl has been allthe activities of Akbar. He has rarely referred to Akbar's
to extol and justify
His Single-minded aim was bedrock of his thought was rationality which commands respect.andIn
and yet the essential religions
shortcomings of the sage Sri Ramakrishna who discovered some truth in all
dway he was the forerunner are viewpoints. He refused to step into the shoes of Barani who
said that there are as many paths as there ruthlessly pulverized the
anti-Hindu and insteademphasized on communal amity. He resplendently reflected
was vehemently its worst, and it is here
that Abul Fazl nost
fanaticism at
Bigots who represented was the quintessence of the Indian culture. This is of enduring
which
the Spirit of broadmindedness, guarantee against sectarian and religious conflict and
recrimination
isthe surest communal conflagration still hangs over the head like
relevance even todayas itthe ignition of
in modern India where threat of
the sword of Damocles.
202 SUMIT MUKERJI

Summary
Emperor Akbar and his workS contain a verital,
Abul Fazl was one of the trusted confidantes of
work of Akbar, particularly his policy in social, economir
repository of information on the life and quantum of data and
administrative, religious and political matters. Abul Fazl accumulated vast
methodology. He was much more
subjected them to searching analysis on the basis of an objective incarnated
broadminded than Zia Barani and epitomized the spirit of liberal pluralism which Akbar by the
despite occasional moves
This was a departure from the culture of the Delhi Sultanate where
Sultans to empower the Hindus, there was no concerted attempt at integration at the religious and
in
philosophical level. The gestures towards the Hindus were actuated by political motives but Abul Fazl
contrast, visualized integration at a deeper, philosophical level. His own persecution, in the handsidealof
Bigots and zealots, was instrumental for this catholicity of outlook. His depiction of Akbar as the
ruler amounted to almost an eulogy and has been criticized by scholars, but despite lack of objectivity
here, Abul Fazl was the exponent of a legacy of tolerance and amity which isrelevant even today as India
grapples with the communal challenge.

Pointsfor Discussion
1. Explain Abul Faz>'s concept of state and sovereignty.
2. How did Abul Fazl challenge the predominance of Ulemas in administration?
3. To what extent did Abul Faz>'s political thought mark a departure from that of the Delhi
Sultanate?
4. Explicate Abul Fazls view of ldeal Ruler. How did he portray Akbar as the Ideal Emperor?
5. How did Abul Fazl describe the socio-economic and religious life of Medieval India?

Glossary
Agnipujak: One who worships fire.
Alim: All-knowing.
Badshah: Emperor.
Bigot: Dogmatist.
Farman: Order.

Ibadatkhana: House of worship.

Jizya: Aper capita yearly tax historically levied by lslamic states on certain non-Muslim subjects.
Kafir: Infidel, an Arabic term (from the root K-F-R'to cover') meaning 'one whocovers the truth: The term alludes
to a person who rejects or disbelieves in God according to the teachings of the lslamic prophet Muhammad.
Mazhar: Phenomenon.
Monotheism: Worship of single deity.
Suhl-i-Kul: Universal peace.