Sanskrit
Chronicles and Sultans of Kashmir
A RESUME
by Professor K. N. Dhar
The
history of Muslim period in Kashmir is as
intriguing as it is revealing. Though a sizeable
number of chronicles, both indigenous and foreign,
contemporary as well as remote, is available for
this phase of Kashmir history, yet the conclusions
arrived at and the facts enumerated are in no way
immaculately objective. These historians, barring
a few, have granted their personal dimensions into
these. Unfortunately for this epoch, the
chroniclers have not been able to extricate
themselves from co-coony meshes of personal likes
and dislikes. Their subjective involvement has
gone a long way in tarnishing the inherent image
of this period in Kashmir history.
Moreover, modern scholars
have not also been able to provide a dispassionate
account of this period in as much as their
knowledge of Persian or Sanskrit, in which the
chronicles of this period are couched is either
scanty or next to nothing. They have usually
depended upon the defective translations, more so
in the case of Sanskrit chronicles, thereby
mutilating the exact import of the events and also
drawing wrong and misleading inferences. Even Dr.
G. M. D. Sufi, author of the monumental work
entitled "KASHEER" has suffered from
this lapse. Therefore, the edge this particular
period has over earlier periods of history, in
terms of contemporary evidence, seems to have been
blunted.
This period in Kashmir
history only oonfirms the age-long truth that the
transitional ferment rides rough shod over the
society when it is turning a new leaf. Old norms
and attitudes melt away before the effulgent
enthusiasm of the new order. It can never be
smooth-sailing on either side. In the Hindu
period, as depicted by Kalhana, whenever a change
in rule was necessitated by the force of
circumstances, it was definitely attended with
scourge and death for the values the earlier kings
had nursed. Even the vestiges smacking of the old
were done away with. The 'new' was enthroned only
on the ashes of the 'old' ! Therefore, it should
not seem surprising or denigrating that the Muslim
rulers got engaged in the crusade of annihilating
the old and installing their way of life with
unrelenting gusts and fervour. The Muslim monarchs
were only respeating the course of history of
their earlier periods in Kashmir. There were such
emancipated kings like Pravarsena, Lalitaditya,
Avantiverman etc, but the majority of the rulers
could not rise above their narrow parochial
loyalties. The same trend is discernible in the
Muslim perid of Kashmir history and is therefore
neither horrifying nor unnecessarily
disheartening. When the dust of this tumult
settled the Muslim period also brought out of its
womb benevolent kings like "Budshah" and
Shahabuddin. Therefore, it does not seem
justifiable or fair to dub this period as
nihilistic or inconoclastic. More recently when,
in the wake of Indian Independence, the political
map of our country was redrawn the Rajas and
Nawabs being dubbed as the representatives of a
dying order were compelled to join the national
stream by persuasion, guile or force. Their states
underwent a transformation beyond recognition.
This kind of friction between the old and the new
is a natural phenomenon and the sparks coming out
of this should not scare us into building a
fallacious or deluding premise. History as such is
a faithful representation coupled with detached
interpretation of events. It is neither propaganda
nor useless kite-flying for imposing own thinking
on others. It is also not a veritable substitute
for reaimentation or indoctrination. After going
through the chronicles of this period, it call be
easily conceded that the Muslim kings did not find
any time to cool their heels and consequently
engage themselves in ushering in a happy
compromise between the dying old and the present
coming to birth. The vulturous scramble for regal
prowess was so intense that brother was after the
blood of brother and son wove plots to overthrow
his parent. In this pernicious climate of
internecine feuds, the king was always expected to
look around with fingers crossed, his maximum
concern being his personal safety. Therefore, to
expect a fair deal for his subjects and society at
large, is a misnomer here. They at best could only
invoke Islamic Brotherhood to keep their authority
in tact. As a corollary to this, they were also
obliged to excite the religious propensities of
their subjects - neo converts, of course - to make
themselves secure on the throne. It was
essentially a political strategy and had nothing
to do with their actual approach to life. Whenever
such mist of distrust and infedility cleared for a
brief spell, the Muslim kings have rendered
yeoman's service to their subject.
In this context, and
fortunately for the posterity, the Sanskrit
chroniclers have tried to keep themselves at arm's
length from the emotional involvement - the bane
of this period. They have striven hard to sit on
the fence and relate the events in more or less a
dispassionate manner. It goes definitely to their
credit that they could maintain the balance
between head and heart in those hectic days when
the links with the past were being broken with
venomous aclacrity. These hitorians had every
reason to get derailed into the jigsaw of
fallacies, in as much as they definitely were the
chips of the old block which was being derided
under their very nose. To speak squarely, these
master-minds wore their profession on their
sleeves.
Four Sanskrit luminaries
heve given an account of the Muslim rule in
Kashmir, in succession. The first Jona Raja was
followed by Shrivara, who took the thread from him
when he (Jana Raja) was cut short by death and
could not complete his assignment. The third was
Prajya Bhatta whose original chronicle is lost but
has been condensed by Shuka in the introductory
portion of his Rajatarangini to make it a
continuous whole. So this gap has been ably
retrieved by the fourth chronicler Shuka, and the
loss has been thus repaired.
Jona Raja
Jona Raja at the very
commencement of his Raja Tarangini acknowledges
the debt he owes to Kalhana - the doyen of
chroniclers of Kashmir. He treats him as hig ideal
and his reputed dictum in respect of history
writing as his guide-line for supplementing
suitably the course of events, where Kalhana had
left it. Kalhana has very aptly remarked:
"That noble-minded
(poet) is alone worthy of praise whose word like
that of a judge, keeps free from love or hatred
in relating the facts of the past."
Jona Raja has faithfully
striven to live upto this maxim. There are some
omissions and commissions here and there, still
this most illustrious, Sanskrit historian of the
Muslim period, being the first in the line, is
also the best, by any standard whatsoever.
In those insecure times
the safety of the chronicles was the prime
concern. The fear of interpolations can also not
be ruled out. Before we proceed to examine
critically the narrative of Jona Raja, it will
again be useful to allude to erroneous inferences
of modern scholars on this subject. Dr. Parmu has
remarked that "His (Jona Raja's) besetting
defect is that he generally puts the poet above
the chronicler". Herein the learned scholar
has innocently betrayed his ignorance regarding
Sanskrit language and literature. Actually the
reverse of it is true which is a compliment to
Jona Raja. Kalhana's Raja Tarangini is classed
under historical poetry in Sanskrit literature. No
such honour has been bestowed upon Jona Rnja's
Raja Tarangini. It is at places versified prose,
to borrow the epithet from Dr. Buhler. In this
respect Dr. R. N. Singh has to say "Jona Raja
after I recording an event proceeds further; he
even skips over the chain of events at the
slightest possible hint. He does not stay behind
to explain it, but transfers this burden to the
reader." Further on, the learned scholar has
remarked, "The Raja Tarangini of Jona Raja is
history. It is neither a biography nor an
eulogy."
Without mincing words,
Jona Raja admits that his chronicle is merely an
"Outline history of King". He does not
make tall claims for elaborating the events or
sitting on judgement on these. Moreover, he very
candidly owns that he was commissioned to write
his chronicle by King Zain-ul-abdin, through the
good offices of Shirya Bhatta, the Head of
Judiciary. Therefore, it may be contended that he
being a professional chronicler and also in the
pay of the sultan, his account might have tilted
in favour of his benefactor. Dr. Mohibul Hassan
does refer to this seemingly believable handicap
by saying, "Being a courtier of Zain-ul-abdin,
Jona Raja is inclined to exaggerate the virtues of
his master and gloss over his failings." On
careful scrutiny of the account given by Jona Raja
about Budshah (Zain-ul-abdin) and his father (Sikandar)
it seems that he has safely steered clear of
personal inclinations.
While describing thc
vandalism of Sikandar in razing temples and places
of pilgrimage of Hindus to the ground, which would
have alienated Jona Raja's sympathy for reasons
obvious, he like a faithful reporter does pay
tribute to the king's administrative acumen. He
does not spare his Sultan from chastisement when
it is due. He vehemently chides his
co-religionists, the earlier Hindu Kings, for
their lack of political foresight and also for
being the slaves of lust.
All told, Jona Raja has
given an account of twenty three rulers of
Kashmir, out of which thirteen are Hindus, one a
Bhautia and nine Muslims. This account covers a
span of 459 years, He has been the contemporary of
Sikandar and Zain-ul-abdin, by virtue of which his
description about these two kings is not only
lucid but also authentic. The general impression
gleaned from the account of Hindu kings is that
their hold on the reins of their kingdom was
tottering under the irresistable weight of court
intrigues, corruption, avarice, lust and sex.
These failings were all the more be meared with
physical and moral cowardice. Therefore, the
occupation of Kashmir by Muslims was a natural
culmination of this choas and confusion.
Degeneration of the highest order had already
permeated the soul of Hindu society and the astute
Muslim struck when the iron was hot. Hindu rulers
had to blame only themselves far this catastrophe.
Their levity did not even allow them to lick their
wounds. Cultural conquest of Hindus had already
commenced when Islam entered the valley a century
or more before Muslim rule was installed here.
Jona Raja treats the reign of these last Hindu
kinds in a very cursory and brief manner. He has
disposed of some Hindu kings in four or five
verses. The brevity he has employed can be
assessed by the fact that the description of
thirteen Hindu Kings is dispensed within 174
verses out of a total of 976 verses comprising his
chronicle. Jona Raja has himself adduced the
reason for his lack of sympathy for these kings,
as alluded to earlier. The chief cause for this
unconcern was that Jona Raja wanted to pick up the
thread from where Kalhana had left it, only to
induct continuity into his chronicle. His main
forte was Muslim Rule, for which alone he was
responsible to King Zain-ul-abdin.
Jona Raja has described
the Muslim Rule at length and a span of 140 years
is covered by him. He could not complete the
assignment of the King as he was probably cut
short in life before he could do the last eleven
years of Budshah's reign have however been
commented upon by Shrivara - a professional heir
to Jona Raja.
Jona Raja treats Shahmeer
as the first Sultan of Kashmir. He ascended the
throne of Kashmir under the name of Shamsud-Din
and ruled for 3 years from 1339 to 1342 A.D. Prior
to his snatching the throne by deceit and guile
from Kota Rani, he was her chief adviser and also
a paramour. After sharing the same bed for one
night with Kota Rani, he got her murdered
alongwith her sons. Thus the last symbol of Hindu
Raj in Kashmir ended. Shahmeer was not an
indigenous sultan, but came perhaps from Persia as
a refugee. Dr. Mohibul Hassan takes him to be a
Turkish adventurer. Even though Jona Raja prefixes
the epithet Sultan with Renchan, the Buddist also
and the implication from it may be that he has
taken Renchan as the first non-Hindu ruler, yet it
was a very brief interlude which was followed by
the restoration of Hindu monarchy. The Muslim rule
entrenched itself in Kashmir, without any break
whatsoever, with the reign of Shahmeer. Hence he
earns the right to be called the first Muslim
ruler of Kashmir.
Jona Raja has not
referred to the episode of "BULBUL
SHAH", who according to Persian chroniclers
converted Renchan to Islam. He only alludes to one
Deva Swami who refused to admit Renchan into Hindu
fold. Furthermore, Jona Raja asserts that it was
the manouering of Shahmeer which got Renchan
initiated into Islam.
Jona Raja has given us a
graphic description of three invasions on Kashmir
prior to the establishment of Islamic rule here :
one by Dulcha, the other by Renchan and the third
by Achala. Dulcha, a Turk with a retinue of sixty
thousand strong cavalary swooped on Kashmir
"like a lion forcing its way into a deer
den."
King Kurushah, whom Jona
Raja has taken as the grandfather of Shahmeer,
tried to buy Dulcha off with a very good amount of
money. Dulcha, whose sole intent was loot and
carnage, did accept the money, but stayed back to
unleash his cruelty over Kashmiris. Jona Raja has
given a heart -rending description of the invasion
of Dulcha :-
"Those Kashmiri
people who had eluded destruction, after the
Dulcha-cat took to heels, came out of their
holes like the mice. When the scourge let loose
by Dulcha did abate (when he was sent away) no
son could find his father, nor father his son,
and brother his brother."
The second invasion was that
of Renchan Buddhist, who came down from northern
mountains to loot and plunder Kashmir. Jona Raja
has said in this connection:
"As a kite swoops on
the birdling having dropped from its perch, in
the same manner the invincible army of Renchan
dispossessed of all belongings Kashmiris."
Afterwards Renchan also
occupied the throne of Kashmir in collaboration
with Kota Rani.
The third invader, Achala
was prevailed upon by Kota Rani not to unleash his
sword on the innocent people. He was invited to
adorn the throne which was lying vacant, as the
king had fled to Ladakh. Achala was taken in and
he disbanded his army. Once he did this, it was
very easy to see him off. Consequently, when
Shahmeer came to the throne, he had a stupendous
task of rehabilitation awaiting him. He acquitted
himself very well in this field and proved to be a
very competent administrator. In the words of Jona
Raja "He changed the face of Kashmir."
The salient facts come to surface while describing
the ascendency to power by Shahmeer. Jona Raja
alludes to the oracle of the great Goddess wherein
She predicted to him (Shahmeer), in a dream, that
his progeny would rule Kashmir henceforth. By
putting this anecdote to pen Jona Raja seems to
have reconciled mentally to the change of power in
Kashmir and also adduced Divine sanction for it.
He has also called Shahmeer as "Kula Natha",
the chief of the Muslim population in Kashmir,
which could put its counter-weight against the
machinations of landed aristocrats, such as
Damaras (Dhars), professional fighters like
Lavyanyas (Lones) and also Bhatta (the entire
Brahmin faction). Perhaps that was the reason why
Kota Rani took him into her service and
confidence. This very influence with his
co-religionists facilitated him to grab power
without a single leaf fluttering in the valley.
His seige of Anderkot (near Sumbal) proved as the
last nail in the coffin of Hindu authority over
Kashmir.
Shahmeer did not live
long to consolidate tbe ravaged Kasbmir. He
breathed his last on the full-moon day in Ashadha
in 1342 A. D., after a brief reign of three years
and five days.
Jona Raja, for reasons
obvious, has cursorily treated the reign of Sultan
Jamsheed (1342-44) and that of Sultan Alla-ud-din
(1344-56) sons and successors of Shahmeer. As he (Shahmeer)
was an astute politician, he transferred the
burden of the kingdom on those two sons jointly,
so that they did not feel foul of each other
afterwards. But the two brothers could not carry
on witll each other and the reign of Jamsheed, for
two ycars, was only a tragic interlude of
conspiracies and brotherly feuds. He was such a
weakling that Jona Raja has aptly used the words
"Being a king in name only, he actually
suffered incessantly till he was relieved by
death." Herein we shall have to refer to the
observation made by Dr. Sufi; he has come to the
conclusion that, as soon as Jamsheed was crowned
king, he was deposed by his brother Ali Sher (Alla-ud-din)
and spent the two years before his death rather in
exile and penury. Dr. Parmu has written that
Jamsheed was killed in 1344 and Dr. Mohibul Hassan
has suggested that "Jamsheed finding himself
not strong enough to fight (against his brother)
fled and after aimlessly wandering about in the
valley for a year and two months died in
1345."
In this context the
account given by Jona Raja does not confirm the
views given by these learned authors. He
unambiguously records that Jamsheed put to sword
so may followers of his conspiring brother Ali
Sher at Avantipur, that "the current of the
Jhelum began to flow upwards due to the heaps of
corpses thrown into the river." He records
further that Sultan Jamsheed made "Sathya
Raja" (Shiraz) responsible for the safety of
the city of Srinagar and himself went for a trip
to Handwara. It has nowhere been suggested by him
(Jona Raja) that the Sultan was forcibly deposed
and also killed. In the words of Jona Raja he died
a natural death after being a Sultan for two years
less by two months.
Jona Raja does allude to
Jamsheed's holding the charge of 'Commissioner of
Guards' stationed at one of the mountain passes,
leading to Kashmir Valley. Perhaps this very
reference of his becoming the 'Commissioner of
Guards' has led these learned authors to do a bit
of unfounded kite-flying. Jona Raja explicitly
lays down that Sultan Jamsheed got fed up with
wars, when Ali Sher inflicted a decisive defeat on
his son. Morever, Ali Sher broke the truce of two
months cease-fire, offered initially by him. All
these factors prompted him to relinquish the royal
authority voluntarily, and during the closing
months of his life he did accept an assignment
much below his status. Therefore, it is
sufficiently clear that he was neither deposed nor
killed.
Ali Sher, assuming the
name of Alla-ud-din ( 1344-1356 A.D.) ascended the
throne of Kashmir by guile, deceit and statecraft.
Despite these defects he was a master-mind in
politics and a dauntless warrior. Two great events
of his reign have been narrated by Jona Raja. The
first being a direct reference to a bevy of
Yoginis (females possessing magical powers), whose
leader has been identified as 'Lalleshwari'. In
Kashmiri tradition, Lalla is not credited with
having found any order of 'Yoginis' at all. She
lived by herself and also in her own thoughts.
Therefore the use of the word 'Chakra' does not
confirm the views by Persian scholars. It might
also cannote the host of eight Yoginis -
attendants of Durga, Shiva's consort. Again,
Kashmiri tradition makes Lalla-Arifa contemporary
with Syed Ali Hamdani (Shah Hamdan), about whom
Jona Raja is surprisingly reticent. It may be
inferred here that Jona Raja did not mention the
name of Shah Hamdan, as he was the sole instrument
for transplanting Muslim faith in place of
Hinduism in Kashmir. The crusade for mass
conversion in Kashmir was initiated by him. Even
if he (Jona Raja) would have liked to refer to
Lalla, Shah Hamdan's mention would have been a
natural corollary to it, as far as Kashmiri
tradition goes. Therefore, he chose to skip over
both these personalities in Kashmir history. The
chief of 'Yoginis' (Nayika), narrated earlier, may
be construed to be a female Tantric worshipper,
otherwise she would not have offered a 'goblet of
wine' to Alla-ud-din. Subsequent Persian sholars
have tried to replace 'wine' by 'milk'- as former
is forbidden by Islam. But Jona Raja has no such
aberrations. Here again, 'Lalla' is never
associated with wine etc in Kashmiri tradition
like the left-band ritualists. Therefore, to infer
from 'Yogini' the existence of 'Lalla', in that
period at least, according to testimony of Jona
Raja, is not only far-fetched but also
preposterous.
However, the silence of
Jona Raja about Lalleshwari and Shah Hamdan should
not erroneously lead us to believe that these two
personages never existed in Kashmir and are only
the figment of imagination. Kalhana has not at all
referred to Abhinavagupta, the reputed Shaiva
Scholar, though other such erudite scholars like
Udbhatta, Rudratta, Vaman and Anandavardhan have
been mentioned profusely by him. Yet Abhinavagupta
did live in Kashmir on the basis of the testimony
of the colophons of his works, in which he has
indicated the year of composition of a particular
treatise. Ho has bequeathed to us his own
genealogy also. The force of tradition is always
irresistible and cannot be dispensed with cheaply.
What is actually meant to be conveyed here is that
although Jona Raja's chronicle, as it is available
to us, does not contain the names of Shah Hamdan
and Lalleshwari, yet their having breathed the air
of Kashmir cannot be doubted.
The second event of
Alla-ud-din's reign is the terrible famine which
shatterd the economy of the country; but Jona Raja
does not write that remedial measures were taken
by the Sultan to offset its unsalutary effect on
the people. Some scholars have wrongly quoted Jona
Raja and ascribed this compliment to Sultan by him
- "But he did all he could to alleviate the
sufferings of his subjects". Actually, Jona
Raja dismisses this calamity in one verse. He
says, "In the nineteenth year of the local
calendar (i.e. 1343 A.D.) a ghastly famine,
tormented the people as a reproof for their bad
deeds". Just after it he gives the date on
which the Sultan breathed his last.
Again, another scholar
has indicated that Sultan Alla-ud-Din transferred
his capital from Anderkot to Alla-ud-din Pora, a
new city founded by the Sultan. The description
given in this behalf by Jona Raja reveals that the
Sultan re-established his capital at Jayapida Pur
- another name of Andrakot. Alla-ud-din shifted
his capital back to Andrakot from Srinagar.
Shahmeer, his father had made Andrakot as the
first capital of Muslim kingdom in Kashmir. He had
sentimetal attachment with it for being associated
with Kota Rani. His elder son Jamshed transferred
the capital to Srinagar, but All-ud-din, from the
view point of safety, shifted it back to Andrakot.
One redeeming feature
during the reign of the first four Sultans comes
to full view. Even though the pace of
proselytisation was gathering momentum every day,
during this period of only three decades or more,
yet the influence of Hindus at the royal court did
not wane. The Hindus occupied the position of
counsellors, advisers or ministers. Sultan
Jamsheed confided in his counsellor Lakshman Bhatt.
Udayashri was probably the prime minister of
Sultan Alla-ud-din and Chandra Damar his
commander-in-ehief. In the company of both these,
the Sultan had caught the glimpse of the Yogini,
as referred to earlier. Similarly Sultan
Shahab-ud-din, when away on military campaigns,
depended upon Kota Bhatt for internal
administration of his kingdom.
Jona Raja is all praise
for Sultan Shahabud-Din and compares him with
Lalita Ditya - the famous warrior-king of ancient
Kashmir.
In the wake of his
illustrious predecessor, Shahab-ud-din also
undertook many military expeditions and even went
as far as Peshawar and Ghazni. His appetite for
extending the borders of his country was
unquenchable. It was also necessitated by the fact
that the kingdom of his predecessors was shrinking
by their incompetence. Several scholars have
doubted the veracity of these campaigns and termed
these as highly exaggerated. Their scepticism is
perhaps based on the misnomer that Kashmiris only
knew how to defend and could never venture to
indulge in offensive. On the testimony of Jona
Raja this assumption is not only unjust but also
unfounded. He (Jona Raja) has narrated that the
Kashmiri Sultan Sikandar was offered a gift of two
elephants by Timur the Lame. Timur, who looted
Delhi without compunction and called himself
invincible, could not have parted with his two
elephants for the King of Kashmir, for nothing in
return. It was definitely the scare of Kashmiri
army, which the Mongol scourage tried to pamper,
so that it did not attack his forces while
returning.
Where diplomacy could not
work, Kashmiris were behind none to defend their
Motherland by a call to steel. Law and order in
the country was firmly established; no
conspiracies or schism polluted the placid
atmosphere; hence the need for moving out for
annexations was keenly felt by the Sultan. The
political geography of Kashmir was now turning a
new leaf. Therefore, the testimony of Jona Raja
regarding the military conquests of Shahab-ud-din
need not be taken with a grain of salt. Kashmiri
armies have penetrated deep into Kishtwar, Bhotia
Pradesh, Lorin and Poonch. The military prowess of
Kashmiris also did show itself off admirably well
later, when Mughals were repulsed not only once
but twice. Jona Raja like an awake artist does
presage that "posterity might take this
account of the superhuman exploits of the Sultan
as mere flattery". This leaves nothing for us
to guess otherwise.
Shahab-ud-din was not a
religious zealot. He was catholic to the marrow of
his bones, not by expediency but by conviction.
When it was suggested to him that the huge idols
of copper and bronze be smolten and converted into
coins, as the imperial mint was running short of
these, he promptly declined to order this
vandalism and said: "How paradoxical it will
seem that I would like to amass fame by breaking
these immortal idols which have been installed and
worshipped by certain people who have earned
approbation (by doing this)".
An unprecedented flood
engulfed Srinagar in his reign, when the surging
waters even mounted the surrounding hills. The
Sultan, therefore, founded an alternate city at
the foot of "SHARIKA SHAIL" (HARI PARVAT)
and named it after his consort Lakshmi, as
Lakshmipur and not Sharikapur. This city extended
from modern 'Hawal' to Lal Bazar. He also founded
one more city, at the confluence of the Vitasta
and the Sindh after his own name, as Shahab-ud-din
pur (modern (Shadipur).
Unfortunately some
Persian historians have painted Shahab-ud-din as
an inconoclast in their misguided enthusiasm for
the propagation of Islam. Jona Raja has
prophetically smelt this and has consequently
warned the future generations: " The king
Shahab-ud-din had broken, the idols of gods; this
preposterous and unfounded assertion should not in
any way unnerve the posterity." Jona Raja was
born in 1389 and died in 1459 A. D.
Shahab-ud-din's span of reign ranges from 1354 to
1373 A. D.; so it is abundantly clear that Jona
Raja's account of Shahab-ud-din's rule is only 16
years anterior to him. In the face of such a brief
interval between the death of Shahab-ud-din and
the birth of Jona Raja his testimony can never be
dismissed cheaply, while the Persian chronicles.
e. g. Baharistan Shahi (1586-1614 A. D.) Haidar
Malik's Tariki Kashmir (1618 A. D. ) and, to crown
all, Peer Hassan's Tarikhi Kashmir ( 1885 A. D. )
depended upon for what they have recorded about
Sultan Shahab-ud din. Theirs is only a hearsay or
wishful thinking while Jona Raja, from the point
of historicity, is more reliable.
To sum up, Jona Raja has
every sort of admiration for this benevolent
Sultan of Kashmir; only Zainulab-din (Badshah)
possesses a slight edge over him according to this
Hindu historian. Kutub-ud-din (Kuda-din) succeeded
his father Shahab-ud-din as the Sultan of Kashmir
from 1373 A. D. The Sultan had to undertake
military compaigns against Raja of Lohara (Lorin)
and the Khashas (Khokhi), inhabiting the south
western belt of Pir Panchal range (Rajori) and
also in Kishtwar. He brought these erring vassals
to book under the generalship of Lolak the Damar.
The Sultan also started a free 'langer' for the
people in view of recurring famines in the valley,
every, year at very huge cost. Through the
blessing of one Yogi Brahma Natha he got the
desired progeny; he had been without any son or
daughter earlier.
He also founded a
township within the city, after his name, as
Qutab-ud-din-pora. Modern scholars have identified
it as the tract of land now known as Mohalla Haji
Peer Mohmad Sahib, (also called as 'Langar Hatta'
bazar near Islamia College to-day). There is a
mohalla in Srinagar bearing this name even now. It
is situated on the left bank of the Jhelum between
Zainakadal and Ali Kadal, some distance below
Gurgari Mohalla. I am led to believe that the
Sultan was in some way the founder of this
locality/habitation. Future research may unfold
some relevant information regarding this.
Sultan Qutub-ud-din
breathed his last in 1381 A.D. At time his son
Sikandar was only eight years old. Being minor,
mother Subhatta acted as his regent and appointed
two advisers, Uddak and Sabak, for efficient
governance of the land. Shri P. N. Bazaz gives her
name as Bibi Hora but does not indicate any
source. The mother had such an immense love for
her elder son Sikandar, that she did not hesitate
to put to sword her own daughter and son-in-law
Mohammed, when it was suspected that they were
conspiring against the reigning sovereign. The
younger son Haibat was also similarly done away
with by poisoning. In such a callous yet judicious
manner the fondling mother paved the way for her
gon to ascend the throne without any impediments,
whatsoever. On assumption of regal power Sikandar
started a compaign of exterminating his foes; his
own brother-in-law (brother of his first wife Shri
Shobha) was not even spared. The two advisers
during the regency of his mother were done away
with. Here-in we shall have to refer to a
controvercy regarding the status of Shri Shobha in
the harem of Sultan Sikandar. Persian chroniclers
have termed her as the second wife of the King ;
but according to Jona Raja this seems to be a wild
guess. He clearly indicates her position as "Mahadevi",
the senior - most queen. When Sikandar married
Mera, the daughter of King of Ohind, Udbhandpur
near 'Attak' in west Panjab, Shri Shobha suffered
in her rank. Mera, being a Muslim by birth, got
precedence over her. Till then the Sultan was not
much biased against Hindus. Again, Jona Raja pays
a compliment to him in as much as the queen Shri
Shobha got the Shiva-temples rennovated,
presumably with the consent of the Sultan. The
valour and terror of the Sultan made him quite
safe and secure on the throne. Perhaps the most
note-worthy event of his reign is his diplomacy
with which he bought peace from Timur the Lame,
who had earlier sacked Delhi. The scanning eye of
the Sultan could not under-rate the invincibility
of this barbarous Turk; hence smelling his
invasion on his land, he sent an emissary to him
when he was camping at the Indus and conveyed his
unflinching loyalty to him. The whimsical Turk
felt flattered by this gesture of servility and
sent a word back to the Sultan to meet him along
with his army at Dipalpur. The Sultan had hardly
reached Baramulla with his retinue when he was
given to understand that Timur had already left
for his homeland Samarkand. This good tidings gave
great relief to the Sultan. The Turk-invader had
been touched by the loyalty of the Kashmiri Sultan
and sent him two royal elephants as a present.
Jona Raja does not give
all these details. He only refers to the gift of
two elephants sent by the "Malchha" King
(Timur), while returning from Delhi, to the
Sultan. But in this very verse he has also
unfolded in one word the cause for this
unbelievable kind gesture from this cruel and
callous invader. He uses the word "the
suspicious Malechha King". Herein this
Sanskrit historian would make us believe that
Timur feared an attack from the Sultan when his
army was returning to Samarkand with invaluable
booty. In order to keep him in good humour the
Turk sent two royal elephants to him. Jona Raja
further extols the towering stature of these
beasts which were definitely a rarity in Kashmir.
Jona Raja acknowledges the superiority of his
Sultan over Timur and in a subdued tone does hint
that the latter wanted to buy neutrality of
Sikandar, for which end in view he sent the gift
of two elephants to him. Like an astute general,
Timur could anticipate Sikandar's sending
reinforcements to Sultan Mohd Tughlak of Delhi. In
order to forestall these designs he overwhelmed
Sikandar with this unique but, all the same, very
respectful gift. During the sack of Delhi it was
free for all, but Sikandar's intervention would
have made a veritable difference. Persian
chroniclers, Hindus as well as Muslims, are
unequivocal in asserting that it was Sikandar who
was actually scared of vandalism of Timur, which
seems more probable. Jona Raja has tried to be
over-patriotic in delineating this incident. At
the same time, he deserves credit also for not
skipping over this great event in Indian History,
when he refers to the sack of Delhi by Timur.
During the initial years
of his rule the Sultan was very forbearing and
charitable. Jona Raja has most graphically
described this trait of the King. He has recorded
"Nobody can describe his charitable
disposition; the lotus-hands (of the Hindu
subjects) would always feel drenched with
water." It is a convention with the Hindus to
receive alms or 'dakshina' (fee etc) with hands
wet with water so that in return they spray the
benefactor with this very water, showering
blessings on him. It is therefore clear that
Sikandar treated the Hindu subjects also kindly
along with the Muslims. Unfortunately the Sultan
could not maintain this policy for long. The visit
of Syed Mohammad Hamdani, the illustrious son of
Amir Kabir, changed his Catholic out-look on life
to a large extent. Jona Raja very diplomatically
ascribes the reason of this great change in the
Sultan to the vices rampant in his (Hindu)
subjects. But at the same time be acknowledges the
over-all superiority of this missionary from
Hamdan. He tells us that "He was a shining
moon among the stars; though very junior in age,
he was adored as the senior-most in
scholarship." The Sultan was in his grip and
under his spell and through his exhortations an
era of unprecedented proselytisation was
inaugurated in Kashmir. Shariat was for the first
time proclaimed as the state religion. He
appointed the ministers, all of them neo-converts:
Ladda Raja, Vaidya Shankar and Suha Bhatta,
perhaps with this unfailing belief that the
converts are more rabid than the originals, hence
will not hesitate to perpetrate every kind of
tyranny on their erstwhile co-religionists.
At the instance of Syed
Mohammed Hamdani the Sultan married Mera, the
daughter of the King of Ohind, who was a born
Muslim. Naturally Shri Sbobha, his first queen,
had to get degraded in status. Her sons were
killed. Mera, gave three sons to the Sultan: Mer
Khan, Shahi Khan and Mohammed Khan. Dr. Mohibul
Hassan has somehow or other inferred that Shri
Shobha had adopted sons. While, quoting Jona Raja
on this subject, incorrectly, he has mentioned no
other source for this inference. Jona Raja has
actually used the epithet "artificial"
with the sons of Shri Shobha. According to Hindu
Dharmashastras adoption is of two kinds - one
"Dattak", the offered and taken, the
other "Kratrim", only for completion of
certain rites of a sonless father, after his
death. In the first the consent of the adopted is
not necessary, while it is imperative in the case
of second, who acts as a waterson. Even though
adoption is banned in Islam, yet this custom of
adoption is not wholly extinct among the Muslims
of Kashmir, even today. Therefore, we can safely
assert that the sons of Shri Shobha were actually
the water-sons. The word used
"artificial" can have other intonation
also. It may mean "unreal". Since the
sons were the progeny of a Hindu queen, hence they
were not real Muslims though given Muslim names.
So they were banished from the state. The sole
motive for their being shunted out of Kashmir
seems to be to keep the throne safe for the (real)
Muslim sons of Mera.
The Sultan founded a new
city at the foot of the Sharika Parbat. Muslim
historians have called it as "Nowhatta"
- the name which has survived to date. They refer
also to his building of the imposing Jama Masjid,
adjacent to the new city.
Actually the
arch-intriguer against the Hindus was Suha Bhatta.
He came under the influence of Syed Mohammad
Hamdani, and was converted to Islam with the name
of Saifud-Din - "the sword of faith." He
may not have proved as much a defender of his
adopted faith, but he did definitely unleash his
sword on Hindus. Herein his name proved prophetic.
Jona Raja equates Suha Bhatta with the ancient
King Harsha - the Turk, the epithet given to him
contemptuously by Kalhana, for the wholesale
destruction of temples and idols. The massive
temples at Martand, Bijbehara, Ishabar (near
Nishat Garden), Triphar (at the foot of Mahadeva
mountain) and in Baramulla district were razed to
the ground.
After demolishing the
temples, the relentless crusader against Hindu
faith, Suha Bhatta turned his attention towards
the persecution of Hindus. He enforced Jazia and
compelled thousands of Hindus to embrace Islam.
Those who resisted were put to sword; some fled
the country for fear of reprisal. But there were
also dauntless believers in Hindu faith who did
raise a banner of revolt against this mass
conversion. Jona Raja gives their names as Sinah
Bhatta and Kastuta - the grocers and Nirmalacharya.
The last mentioned spurned the royal patronage and
preferred penury to change of faith. The excesses
Committed by the subordinate officers cannot
absolve the reigning king from the infamy thus
earned and sins committed; hence the tyranny let
loose by Suha Bbatta paid its toll back in the
shape of the Sultan's incurable malady. Seeing his
end near, he annoinated his eldest son Mir Khan
(Ali Shah) as his successor and breathed his last
on the eighth day of the dark fortnight or Jeth in
4489, the year of the local calendar. It comes to
1413 A.D. according to the English calendar.
Before the account of
Sikandar, as given by Jona Raja, is concluded it
will be pertinent to refer to the meticulous
caution with which the historian has tried to
cover up the mis-deeds of the Sultan by keeping
Suha Bhatta only in the dock. Perhaps Jona Raja
did not like to malign the parent of his
benefactor (Budshah) for reasons obvious and
consequently shifted all the odium to Suha Bhatta
and to Hindus. But at the same time he does say
that the Sultan could not wash his bands off these
atrocities. His tacit consent must have been
obtained by Suha Bbatta tbrough the good-offices
of Syed Mohammad Hamdani, who was actually the big
boss in those dark days. The Sultan was always at
his beck and call and could not go against his
wishes. Persian historians have advanced many
reasons for Suha Bhatta to wreck vengeance on his
erstwhile co-religionists, but Jona Raja has
simply written that he came under the magnetic
spell of Syed Muhammad Hamdani and at his bidding
took to heaping inhumanities on Hindus and their
religion.
In discharging his
mission of persecuting Hindus he had to prove that
he was more loyal than the king. His
over-enthusiasm in this respect can be squarely
explained by the fact that being a convert his
go-slow policy could have been misunderstood, and
also misinterpreted; hence he had to look like the
most devout Muslim and the most zealous partner in
this "Jehad" against the Hindus. The
fanciful inferenccs of Persian historians in this
regard have no credence as the contemporary record
of Jona Raja is silent on these.
Mir Khan assumed the name
Ali Shah on ascending the throne. He, after
fruitless flirtation with regal splendour, decided
to undertake pilgrimage to Mecca and nominated his
brother Shahi Khan (Zainulabdin) as his successor.
But being prevailed upon by his father-in-law, the
Hindu Raja of Jammu, he changed his mind and
returned to Kashmir. Shahi Khan did not resist his
taking up the mantle of Sultan once again. Later
he was killed in a battle with Khokhars, thus
paving the unobstructed way for Shahi Khan to
ascend the throne. These two incidents are perhaps
sufficient to prove that the inherent tenets of
Muslim faith had not made any substantial headway
in the Valley, though the population was being
admitted into its fold by hook or by crook. This
was only a political expediency. The King Ali Shah
had married two daughters of Hindu Raja of Jammu,
which is un-Islamic, since a Muslim has been
ordained to marry a non-Muslim only when he or she
is converted to Islam. It is also enjoined in
Islam that two real sisters cannot be wives to the
same spouse concurrently. Moreover, once a 'Kasad'
(resolution) is made to undertake Haj, it should
not be revoked in any case. This very background
facilitated Budshah to rehabilitate Hindus, as the
loyalty of the people to their new faith was not
even skin-deep as yet. It may well be called just
a change of label from Hindu to Muslim, the
neo-converts were still finding their feet, their
only hobby was to pay off old scores under the
garb of religious crusades. Shahi Khan (Budshah)
as a prince already had a foretaste of this, when
the adjoining Hindu tribes and neo-convert tribes
of Thakurs and Khokhars had helped him to regain
the throne from his brother. Therefore on
assumption of power he elected to own benevolence
instead of violence. Sultan Sikandar and his
evil-genius Suha Bhatta failed to cash on this
policy of conciliation instead of confrontation,
thereby mutilating their image in Kashmir history.
Jona Raja has very
rightly referred to this change of heart in
Budshah. The Sultan effected far-reaching and
sweeping adjustments to make the Hindus
comfortable and thereby he made amends for the
sins of his predecessors.
So much ink has been
spent in delineating the golden reign of Budshah,
that it would seem redundant to repeat all this.
However, some light needs to be thrown on two or
three points which have been more or less glossed
over by the authors.
The first point which
deserves emphasis is that Zain-ul-abdin was never
under the influence of Hindus. He was a devout
Muslim and would consult the Shaikul-Islam on
every measure he would like to introduce. Perhaps
this is also the reason that "Shariat"
as the state-religion could not be replaced. In
accordance with its dictates, Jazia also was not
revoked entirely, but fixed at a lower rate.
Zain-ul-abdin could not dare to go totally against
the current of public opinion, built brick by
brick by his forefathers, so far as treatment
towards Hindus was concerencd. Fanatics did raise
their eye-brows on his attitude towards the Hindus
and for this very purpose Syed Sad Ullah came from
Mecca with a huge load of books. He tried to
cajole the Sultan into reversing this tolerant
policy, but the latter did not oblige. Budshah
seems to have been more awake than those zealots
who would try to foist their faith on others not
by persuasion but through coercion. He therefore
first of all called upon his own kinsmen to set
their house in order. Muslims had multiplied
themselves into different sects; Shias, Sunnis,
Sayeds, Sufis and were vying with each other to
show the other sects down. The Sultan could very
well anticipate that once the object of their
combined hatred - the Hindu was gone, they would
fall out among themselves. Once such a nihilistic
propensity is nurtured, it can express itself in
any shape whatsoever. Therefore like a true
follower of the Prophet be tried to consolidate
the Muslim Brotherhood and exhorted them to sink
their differences and close their ranks. It would
have done more harm than good to the spread of
Islam. How prophetically Budshah hinted towards
this, can be easily corroborated by the subsequent
Chak rule over Kashmir. Therefore, reinstallation
of the irritant - the Hindu- did not only do good
to him but also made the Muslim society cohesive
and viable.
The second point which
needs explanation here is the appointment of the
Hindus to very responsible posts. The
neo-converts, thinking themselves dandies, could
not be expected to handle the intricate problems
of statecraft. Moreover, they were actually the
scum of the Hindu population; hence their
credentials for running the government could not
be depended upon, and the proverbial Eleven had
survived the tyranny of the earlier Sultans. The
state was in the doldrums owing to lack of
foresight on the art of the predecessors of
Budshah. Draught and flood in his reign trade the
state poorer all the more. In this predicament a
hunt for Brahmin talent was made, so that the
state be entrusted to it to set things in order.
Moreover, the Hindu, unbelievably elevated to such
position after an interval of condemnation, had
perforce to appear more loyal than the king and
would apply his heart and soul together to prove
his capability. Thus the state was again put on
the rails and attained the speed which it had
squandered earlier. Tilakacharya, Shriya Bhatta,
Sinhabhatta, Ruyya Bhatta, Karpura Bhatta,
Ramananda, Gaurak Bhatta, Jaya Bhatta and a host
of such luminaries administered tho land of their
birth with unparalelled devotion and to the best
of their capacity. In the bargain Budshah made
double gain. He became the champion of the
uaderdog - the Hindu - and also gave his state a
very good government.
Tbe third point regarding
the renovation of the temples aod grant of lands
to the Hindus can also be explained in this
manner. During the reign of earlier Sultans,
more-so when Sikandar through Suha Batta unleashed
an era of unprecedented tyranny over the Hindus,
the temples were annihilated and the Hindus wsre
fleeing the country, leaving bebind the jagirs
attached to these temples fallow and desolate. The
neo-converts only relished in bringing death,
destruction and loot, but never cared to attend to
these jagirs for getting produce out of tbem. At
best they could think ooly of converting temples
into mosques but that sentiment alone could in no
way act as the substitute for sustenance.
Budshah's scaaning eye
could very well locate tbe disease; so he not only
pledged safety to the biding Hindus, but also
coaxed those, who had left, to return to their
homeland. Rennovation of temples was executed
under the supervision of Shriya Bhatta, which
restored confidence into Hindu folk. Once again
the lands attached to these temples were brought
under plough and the food prospects of the country
improved substantially.
Moreover in the wake of
building a network of canals and water feeders, he
rehabilitated the Hindus also on the land thus
reclaimed. It served the purpose of replenishing
the government treasury with tbe revenue these
lands yielded. Whatever the inherent motive of
Budshah regarding these steps, it is laudable on
his part to usher in liberalism, despite the
resentment of his Muslim subjects. He stood his
ground firmly well and that is perhaps the
indisputable reason which makes him the tallest of
all the sultans in Kashmir. He possessed an
unbending sinew and could never be swayed by
passion. His reason thoroughly groomed was not
only precise but also perfect. When the
neo-converts under instructions from Syed Sad
Ullah, who harboured a grudge against the king, as
alluded to earlier, got arrowed to death a Yogi
who had blessed the Sultan with male issues, he at
first sought the counsel of the Shaikhul Islam,
who decreed tbat "eye for eye" treatment
be meted out to him. But the king did not like to
act in haste and also alienate the sympathies of
the Muslims. He introduced a novel method of
punishing Sad Ullah by making him ride a donkey
with his face towards its tail and his beard
singed off. Tbe people werc asked to spit at him
wherever he was conducted in this plight, but the
King spared him his life. In other words he
extended immunity from death to Syeds also, as was
tbe practice regarding tbe Brahmins in earlier
Hindu period. Undoubtedly the Sultan resurrected
the dying human values, nursed these with his
sharp intellectual prowess and tried to sell these
out to his co-religionists. Nature willed
otherwise. When his reign, like the flicker of a
glow-worm in engulfing darkness, came to an end,
his successors could not appreciate the exact
import of his emancipated outlook, but reverted to
wbolesale repression on Hindus, that also with
vengeance.
Jona Raja has given us an
eye-witness account of the first thirty-nine years
of the reign of this gracious Sultan. He concludes
tbe account abruptly at verse 976, without
adducing any reason for it. The account of
penultimate eleven years of his rule has been
narrated by Shrivara in his Zaina Tarangini, as
already indicated.
This benevolent Sultan,
by commissioning Jona Raja to pen down his
history, has been instrumental in doing permanent
good to the annals of Kashmir. No contemporary
Persian chronicle has come down to us in this
respect. The earliest Persian reference to Kashmir
is contained in 'Tarikhi-Feroz Shahi' (1285-1286
A. D.) by Zia-ud-Din Barni. Obviously this is a
historical record about Fetoz Shah Tughlak of
Delhi. Montion of Kashmir hao come there-in in a
casual manner. Mulla Ahmad's 'Tarikhi Kashmir',
was composed after the reign of Budshah. It can
conveniently be treated as the first Persian
chronicle of the Sultans af Kashmir. In view of
this, by getting the events recorded by
contemporary Hindus, the king not only provided an
authentic base to these, but also bequeathed to
the future scholars enough material to build up
his personality, after exchanging the notes of
Sanskrit and Persian histories. It will not be an
exaggeration to say here that his period alone can
take rightful pride in being authentic in Kashmir
History. Jona Raja has performed his mission with
honesty of purpose and dedication to his
profession. His account of Budshah, though
incomplete, is not wanting in any thing. It is
neither magnified nor played down. The subsequent
Persian chroniclers, without any exception, have
profusely drawn from him and then only built,
their respective theses. Kashmiris owe a debt to
Jona Raja for erecting the contours of a
light-house of accurate historicity which reduces
to nullity thankless pastime of groping in the
dark.
Shrivara
Without beating about the
bush, Shrivara straightway adduces two reasons for
taking up the thread of chronicle-writing from
Jona Raja. Firstly, be writes "I have taken
this assignment simply to complete the unfinished
History of Kings written by Jona Raja, whose
disciple I am". At the same time he, in all
humility, confesses his diffidence, to reach up to
his guru's heights. Secondly, he acknowledges the
fillial affection which Sultan Zain-ul-abdin
nourished for him and to repay his debt towards
him elected to write history, so that posterity
does not forget him altogether. He pays back what
he owed to the Sultan, not in terms of gold which
is perishable, but in words throbbing with his
gratitude for him, imperishable of cours. No
better deal than this could be imagined. He made
his name immortal while his treasures and regal
splendour lie buried in the womb of past. Shrivara
makes the Sultan live in the present even though
belonging to the days of yore.
As has been indicated
earlier Jona Raja could not write the account of
penultimate eleven years of Budshah's reign. He
was snatched away by the icy hands of death. So in
all sincerity Shrivara records that Jona Raja
mounted the funeral pyre in the 35th year of the
local calendar which works at 1457 A.D. So, the
commencement of his treatise can be taken safely
from this year, and he also could complete the
account of Kashmir Sultans upto the year 1486 A.D.
only, much against his wishes. Therefore, Shrivara
records the events of more or less 29 years as an
eye witness. Even though he has veneration for his
Guru Jona Raja, yet he has arranged his chronicle
on the pattern used by Kalhana; he alone seems to
be his ideal in this field. Jona Raja has given
verses serially without breaking these into
sections or subsections. Shrivara has revived the
"Taranga" form of dividing history into
cantos. He has also indicated the subjects he has
treated in a particular canto at the end of each.
With this astute wakefulness on his part, he got
rid of the interpolations whatsoever. Beginning
the History of Kashmiri Sultans with the last
eleven years of Budshah he has ended it with the
Sultan Fatehshah's accession to the throne. In
between these he has treated profusely Haider
Shah, Hassan Shah and Mohammad Shah - a span of
Kashmir History covering nearly 29 years. In the
colophon of his last canto he only says that
"This canto has ended", but does not
indicate that Zaina Tarangini, as a whole, has
come to an end. This clearly establishes that he
was also not destined to complete whole of the
project. His untimely death must have intervened
to leave it incomplete like his guru Jona Raja. He
has captioned his "River of Kings" as
Zaina Tarangini directly as well as at end of each
canto, which proves beyond any doubt that his
forte was to describe the reign of Budshah only in
the first instance. Budshah's successors have been
described only to preserve the continuity of the
Sultan. At that time many compositions were named
after the Sultan -N oth Soma composed "Zainacharita",
Yodha Bhatta : "Zaina Prakash" and
Bhatta Avtar : "Zaina Vilasa". Shrivara
also took after the fashion of the time; hence
instead of christening his chronicle as Raja
Tarangini, he gave it the title "Zaina
Tarangini". Shrivara while unfolding the
events of reign of the Sultan clearly mentioned
that he would describe the rule of the king along
with his son - presumably Haji. Perhaps this
insertion proves that towards the closing year of
his reign Zainul-ab-Din had become ineffective and
tbe power was auctually concentrated in the hands
of his sons; so this historian could not afford to
ignore the authority of the son while describing
the reign of his father. Furthermore, Shrivara
spares us the trouble of making unnecessary
conjectures in this behalf by recording that the
Sultan was so much scared of his other sons that
he kept Haji always with himself, perhaps as a
veritable shield for any surprise attack on him.
His tactics were to play one brother against the
other, so that he would himself remain unscathed
and steer safe between the two. Shrivara has
described the reign of Badshah in a more detailed
manner than his predecessor Jona Raja. While Jona
Raja has dispensed with the first 39 years of the
rule of the Sultan in 267 verses, Shrivara has
treated a far less span of years in 786 verses.
Two unforeseen natural
calamities befell Kashmiris in those years. The
first was the unprecedented rains in Chet i. e.
March and April. Shrivara even says that dust did
pour down from the sky which obstructed the
prospects of rice-sowing with tbe result that food
shortage loomed large before the denizens of this
land of plenty. Perhaps to accentuate the
conditions of famine snow fall was unexpectedly
witnessed in the month of Maghar i.e. October. The
crops already hit by unprecedented rains earlier,
were engulfed by early snow. Whatever food could
be salvaged from the fields was turned to dust
before ripening. The cycle of famine was thus
complete. Shrivara gives a vivid, yet pathetic,
description of people tormented by hunger. The
thieves breaking into houses at night 1eft gold,
silver and money untouched, but ransacked every
utensil for laying hands on food. The people were
forced to eat vegetables, roots and fruits. When
these got exhaugted tho people did not spare the
leaves of the trees, more especially the "Bandhujiva"
(sustainer of the kind literally, actually the
name of the sun-flower plant). One 'khari' of
paddy which used to sell at three hundred dinars
was now available at fifteen hundred dinars and
that also with much difficulty.
The Sultan rose upto this
misfortune without losing his nerve. He devised
many means to ameliorate the sufferings of his
people. He purchased paddy at a very high cost,
even imported it and gave it to people at
subsidised rates. The black marketeer were brought
to book and artificial scarcity created by these
was reduced to a large extent. He also opened free
'langars' for the most poor section of his people.
To crown all, he opened avenues of work for
people, so that they could earn wages and thus
keep wolf out of the door. Earth-work camps were
installed; edible oil was got extracted from the
walnuts and other kinds of greases from the pines
and otthr forest trees. Above all he enforced
moratorium on debts - the agencies of lending and
borrowing were abolished.
Zainul-ab-Din had also to
contend with the runaway habits of his son Adam
Khan who even tried to snatch the throne from the
Sultan. Contequently the King had to bring him to
bay at Pallashila, near Shopian where a fierce
fight took place between the father and the son.
Adam Khan was repentent, hence his life was spared
by the orders of the Sultan. Conspiracies and
counter-conspiracies in his court were as much
responsible for this rebellious character of Adam
Khan. The Sultan returned to his capital and
erected a pyramid of the skulls of Adam Khan's
soldiers, put to sword in his war. This was the
reason why the Sultan annoinated Haji Khan as the
heir-apparent. Adam Khan went into self-exile. On
the heels of the earlier flood and consequent
famine in the thirty sixth year of the reign of
the Sultan, i.e. in 1460 A.D., orily after two
years, this scourage repeated itself. Another bolt
from tbe blue made the conditions in Kashmir far
more worse. All the rivers, namely Vitasta, Ladri,
Veshav, Sindh and Kuta Kol were in spate due to
torrential rains and vied witheach other in
recording the highest water-level. The king, in
order to see for himself the ravage wrought by
this flood, toured the districts submerged under
water in a boat. He felt grieved to see the paddy
under water, foreboding shortage of cereals. At
last the swaying waves found respite at Sonawari.
Persian historians have not described this second
flood at all. Since Shrivara's evidence is of
contemporary importance, hence his testimony to
this effect cannot be discredited.
Fireworks were also
introduced in Kashmir in the reign of Budshah.
Shrivara has profusely described the different
varieties of these made by Kashmiri artisans, e.
g. the arrows, the discs, the sheets, the tubes
tied with string and waved in the air, the
petal-shedding flowers, the wavy-serpents etc. The
mastermind behind all these inventions was one
"Habib". Salt-petre and sulphur were
also harnessed into making guns and cannons. For
the first time in the history of Kashmir such
missiles were invented and used. Shrivara even
gives the date of this marvellous invention, which
is 1465 A. D. He further says that it was called
"Top" in Muslim language and
"Kanda" in popular dialect. The Sultan
had also maintained a river-army, more or less a
navy in miniature. This wing of the arm was
provided boats for the mobility of soldiers, on
water ways where the floats would take place,
Shrivara has penned down that one "Deva"
by name was the chief of this force.
The Sultan was also very
receptive to fine arts. He was not only a gifted
singer (vocalist as well as instrumentalist)
himself, but also showered limitless bounties on
talented singers. The musical instrument "Rabab"
is actually indigenous. Out of ignorance some
Persian historians have asserted that it was
imported here from Iran. Shrivara's contemporary
evidence in this behalf cannot be contradicted. He
says "The invention of this musical
instrument Rabab Behlol and other Vocalists were
munificently rewarded by the King."
The Sultan was torn with
grief towards the cloging years of his life. The
sole cause for his dismay, which eventually broke
his health was the fued between his sons. His
eldest son Adam Khan did not refrain from waging
war against his father. The King died with a
broken heart on Friday, the twelfth of Jeth, in
the year 1527 Bikrimi (1470 A. D.), having ruled
for fifty-two years. In the words of Shrivara -
"On that day the houses were devoid of smoke,
as no cooking was done in the city. The people
became life-less and speechless with grief on
being bereaved of their master."
He was laid to rest in
his ancestral graveyard (Mazari-Salatin) near the
grave of his father Sikandar. A gravestone
glittering like transparent crystal was erected
there with an epitaph inscribed on it. However
this stone is missing at present in the
Mazari-Salatin. If it were discovered, the exact
date of the Sultan's demise could be found out
without any brain-racking whatsoever.
In view of the strife
amongst his sons, his advisers had suggested to
the Sultan that he should name his heir - apparent
in his life time. Adam Khan had already revolted
against his father and was living at Jammu with
his maternal uncle. The youngest Behram was not
also looked upon kindly by his father, the Sultan.
Even though he (the Sultan) had a soft corner for
Haji Khan, the second son, yet he refrained from
nominating him as his successor. He simply said,
"I will not confer my kingdom on any one of
my sons during my life-time. He, who is strongst
amongst them all, will definitely get the throne
after I am no more."
So, when Budshah breathed
his last, Haji Khan his second son ascended the
throne on the first day of dark fortnight of Jetha
in 1470 A.D., but was destined to reign only for
one year and ten months. Adam Khan the eldest was
in self-exile and the youngest Behram Khan was
paid the price of 'Nagam-jager' for renouncing his
claim to the throne. Moreover, the Kuchhais, a
local clan were in fovour of Haji Khan. All these
causes contributed to his coming to power. He
assumed the name of Haider Shah as sultan and
issued his royal-seal under this very name. He was
annointed as the king, by the Royal Treasurer,
Hassan Kuchbai with due religious formalities.
Herein it may be said without any fear of
contradiction that Sultan Haider Shah ordered the
performance of age-old Hindu rites of "Raja-Tilak"
along with the Muslim ceremonies pertinent to the
assumption of kingship. On that auspicious day
whole of "Sikandar - puri" (present
Nowshehra), near Srinagar was profusely
illuminated.
His first act as the
Sultan was to confer the Jagir of Nagam "of
fertile soil" upon his younger brother Behram
Khan. He also gave away Ikshika (Pachhagom near
Damodar udar) and Kamraz to his son Hassan and
proclaimed him as his heir-apparent. The rulers of
Rajori and Indus (Sindhu) who had come to take
part in his coronation were honoured by the
Sultan.
An extraordinary event
during his reign has besmeared the reputation of
tolerance built brick by brick by his father
Budshah. The Sultan was actually a nincompoop and
given to licentious addiction to wine and women.
One barber, a neo-convert "Purna" by
name earned his confidence and also acted as his
pimp and tout. This barber lost his head by thc
unbelievable protection he received from the
Sultan, for reasons obvious, and began to unleash
a reign of terror on the people, especilly the
Hindus. The limbs of offenders were got amputated
on a light excuse. Being suffocated by such
tyranny the Hindus gave expression to their
pent-up feelings by damaging the "Khanqah"
of the Sayid. The Muslim subjects of the Sultan
being exasperated by this sacrilege prompted him
to teach a lesson to tho Hindu subjects by
inflicting most inhuman atrocities on them. In
this context Shrivara has recorded: "The
Sultan, torn to the quicks by this, got the hands
and noses of many Hindus amputated. He even
ordered the demolition of the idol at the
Bahu-Khatkeshwara, the presiding Bhairva of the
City."
Intensity of such
atrocities compelled many Hindus to foresake their
own faith and dress, and declare that they were
not Bhattas. In this connection it may be safely
asserted that 'Nabatu', the colloquial phrase in
Kashmiri even current today, denoting total
annihilation of Bhattas has its origin in 'Na
Bhatta Aham' (I am not a Bhatta). This is the
second 'Nabatu" in the series on records, the
first being in the reign of Sikandar. Adam Khan,
the eldest son of Budshah and virtually having an
undisputed title to the throne, thought this time
most propitious to invade Kashmir and snatch away
kingship from his brother Haider Khan. He was not
far from wrong in choosing this time for his
attack. The king was oblivious to his duties and a
sizable portion of his subjects was disgruntled.
About the law and order situation prevailing at
that time in Kashmir, Shrivara has remarked-
"The thieves, the jackals, the cruel, the
adulterors, the crimnals and the deceitful roamed
about during the day even." Adam Khan wanted
to invade Kashmir through Poonch. In the meanwhile
the Sultan smelling the perfidy and colloboration
of Hassan Kuchhi (who had anointed him as the
Sultan) with Adam Khan, got him assasinated. On
hearing this Adam Khan retreated to Jammu. But he
was not destined to live long. While fighting on
the side of Manikya Deva of Jammu, his maternal
uncle, against the Moguls, Adam Khan was killed.
Haider Khan got his dead body to Srinagar and he
was buried beside his mother at Suhyar, on the
bank of Jhelum between Ali Kadal and Nawa Kadal.
The Sultan had become so
week-minded and suspicious that he did not accord
befitting reception even to his son Hassan
returning from his victorious military expedition
outside Kashmir. His Nero-like disposition has
been graphically delineated by Shrivara when the
Lakshimpur, a town founded by Shahabud Din (at the
foot of Hari Parbat), was in flames and the five
annexes of his own residence ( as the prince )
were burning the Sultan ascended the roof of his
palace and felt so much jubiliant (on seeing the
ravages of fire) that he began to indulge in
drinking there and then." While attending a
drinking party in his lotus-palace, his foot
slipped on the marble floor. He fell down and his
nose began to bleed profusely. He swooned into a
coma from which he never recovered afterwards. He
breathed his last in the month of Baisakh on
Basant Panchmi in 1472 A.D. At that time the Royal
power was swinging between his uncle Behram Khan
and the prince Hassan, like a person of suspicious
disposition not knowing on whom to depend."
Shrivara has clearly
indicated that a knotty problem of succession to
Haidar Shah confronted the courtiers when the
Sultan died. One Ahmed Yatu (whom Shrivara calls
as "Ayukta" or the Commissar), after
having consultations with the nobles offered the
crown to Behram Khan, the youngest son of Budshah
on one condition that he would declare Prince
Hassan as his heir-apparent. He did not agree to
this. Ahmed Yatu, with the consent of the
ministers, thought it more expedient to confer
sultanate on inexperienced Hassan than on
turbulent and haughty Behram. The learned
historians of this period, Dr. Parmu, Dr. Mohibul
Hassan. Dr. Kapur have applied the axe there and
have erroneonsly inferred that Prince Hassan got
the throne without any murmur from Behram Khan.
The actual facts are that Behram Khan did collect
the forces loyal to him when the negotiations with
Ahmed Yatu broke down. Skirmishes did take place,
but the roval guards under the command of
Abhimanyu thwarted the plans of Behram Khan.
Moreover, Shrivara has recorded unambiguously that
when Prince Hassan was informed that the city was
cleared off of the enemies and he himself was safe
and secure, he ordered the coffin of his father to
be taken to the ancestral grave-yard. About
Hassan's contender for power (Behram Khan)
Shrivara goes on to say, "On hearing about
the exploits of his nephew (Prince Hassan) and the
very low morale of his own forces, Behram Khan
left Kashmir along with his son." The
chronicler has implicitly narrated that Behram
Khan wanted to usurp the throne through force, but
Prince Hassan with his bravery over - whelmed his
(Behram's) army which ultimately got depressed. No
other course was lelt to Behram but to flee the
country of his birth like his eldest brother Adam.
He took his son with, so that he would escape the
usual reprisal. If we care to read between the
lines about the mention of burial of Haider Khan
by Shrivara, the natural inference would be that
the burial was delayed because of the uncertain
conditions in the city. There must have been
street fights between the adherents of Behram and
admirers of Hassan. That is also the reason that
the Prince had to postpone his coronation by
sixteen days. The culmination of this internecine
fued we find later, at the very outset of Hassan
Shah's rule. Only when calm was restored in the
city and it was declared safe for the royal
cortege to move to the ancestral burial-ground,
Prince Hassan accompanied the coffin of his father
to the grave-yard and laid to rest his father
Haider Shah towards the feet of his parent Budshah
at Mazari Salatin. Everybody present at the
funeral threw a handful of earth over his grave.
When it got filled up with earth a grave stone
higher in the middle was raised on it with the
epitaph that "the Sultan was relentless in
war." With all his defects, as enumerated
earlier, Haider Shah was a great lover of music
and fine arts. He composed poetry in Persian and
also in the "Language of Hindustan" i.e.
(doubtlessly) Hindi. He was also very adept in
flute - playing and was considered a past- master
in this art. The rabab - players like Bahlol and
others were generously rewarded by him. The
disciple of Khwaja Abdul Qadir Mulla Daud taught
him to play on Veena.
Before concluding we may
refer to some points on general information as
narrated by Shrivara. Due to excessive use of
liquor here in Kashmir, or the decline in the
growth of grapes, wine was extracted from suger-beet
for the first time here. This "Fairy land of
Grapes", so dear to Kalhana and Bilhana, had
now declared its bankrupcy in producing this sweet
luscious fruit any more.
Shrivara also for the
first time gives the synonym of Vitasta as Jhelum.
Till his time we nowhere find this notice of
Jhelum in Sanskrit chronicles.
The Sultan though a
chronic addict would sometimes pass off nights in
vigil listening to the Puranas and other
scriptures (of Hindus) laying down the guidelines
for salvation. He felt very much impressed by
these. Perhaps this was the sole reason which
prompted the Sultan to entrust his son, Prince
Hassan to Shrivara for his all round upbringing.
Shrivara would narrate the tales from Brhat Katha
to him. Shrivara has for the first time made
mention of the Dal Lake, which name persists even
today. Prior to him this lake was known by the
name of "Sureshwari Sara." He also
refers to the floating gardens on its surface and
the twin 'lankas' (islands) of 'Ropa' and 'Sona'
there. He writes "spread over twelve miles
this Dal Lake has for its constant companion the
Hari Parvat which in the hope of reaping virtuous
reward always drenches itself with its holy water
- (is reflected in its water always). According to
Shrivara the bank of Dal Lake was a hub of
cultural and social life of Kashmiris at that
time. There, on its bank, were the places of
pilgrimage, monastries, palaces, hostels for
students and the pennance-groves so more
sanctified than Varanasi." Likewise he has
used the epithet "Ullol" for "Mahapadmasar"
- the name of the Wular Lake then. One glaring
fact comes to surface while going through the
reigns of Budshah and his son Haider Shah: that is
the ascendancy of Sayeds. In a sense this clan,
which got power firstly through the magnetic
personalities of Syed Ali Hamdani and his son Syed
Mohammed and also through matrimonial alliances
with the reigning kings, can be safely called
non-Kashmiri. They are supposed to be the direct
descendants of Prophet Mohammed. Budshah offered
his daughter to Syed Nissar and made him the
governor of one of the provinces, probably Beerwah,
as it is known now. Budshah had even himself
married Bodha Khatoon, a Sayed. He also got a
Sayed spouse for his son Prince Haibat. Sultan
Haider Shah married his son Hassan to a Sayed
girl, daughter of Miyan Hassan. In this way, the
three Sultans - Budshah, Haidershah and Hassan
Shah, the grandfather the father and the son, had
Sayed queens. Therefore, the Sayeds had ample
opportunities to come to power over and above the
heads of the local factions of Maliks, Magreys,
Kuchhais and Yatus. The 'History of Sultans'
heretofore is actually a continuous strife between
these clans to capture power. At times the
helpless Sultan had to surrender to the chief of
the victorious faction and appoint him as his
Prime Minister.
The Sayeds, commanding
respect in the 'harem' got intoxicated by the
power they enjoyed with the Sultans and did not
behave well and had to be exiled from Kashmir many
a time.
|