JAT WOMEN WERE ALSO CAPTURED BY FOREIGN MUSLIM INVADERS AND WERE MADE SLAVES
MUALIM MADE JAT SLAVES
INITIALLY JAT HELPED KASIM AND
POPULATION OF BSINDH WAS MAINLY BAUDH
LEGACY OF
MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY K S LAL Page 79
Iconoclasm
and razing other peoples temples is central to Islam; it derives its
justification from the Quranic revelations and the Prophets Sunnah or practice.
Muhammad had himself destroyed temples in Arabia and so set an example for his
followers. In return the mujahid (or fighter of Jihad) is promised handsome
reward in this world as well as in the world to come. Without Jihad there is no
Islam. Jihad is a religious duty of every Muslim. It inspired Muslim invaders
and rulers to do deeds of valour, of horror and of terror. Their chroniclers
wrote about the achievements of the heroes of Islam with zeal and glee, often
in the very language they had learnt from their scriptures. Inspired by such
belligerent injunctions, Muhammad bin Qasim (and later on other invaders)
started on the Indian expedition with a large force. On the way the governor of
Makran, Muhammad Harun, supplied reinforcements and five catapults. His
artillery which included a great ballista known as the Bride, and was worked by
five hundred men, had been sent by sea to meet him at Debal.7 Situated on the
sea-coast the city of Debal was so called because of its Deval or temple. It
contained a citadeltemple with stone walls as high as forty yards and a dome of
equal height. Qasim arrived at Debal in
late 711 or early 712 C.E. with an army of at least twenty thousand horse and
footmen.8 Add to this the Jat and
Med mercenaries he enlisted under his banner in India.9 A glance at the
demographic composition of Sind at this time would help in appraising the
response of the Sindhians to Muhammads invasion. At the lower rung of the
social order were Jats and Meds. Physically strong and thoroughly uneducated
they flocked under the standard of the foreigner in large numbers in the hope
of material gain. They also supplied Muhammad with information of the
countryside he had come to invade.10 THE
MAJORITY OF THE SINDHI POPULATION WAS BUDDHIST (Samanis of chronicles),
totally averse to fighting. Their religion taught them to avoid bloodshed and
they were inclined to make submission to the invader even without a show of
resistance. Then there were tribal people, like Sammas, to whom any king was as
good as any other. They welcomed Muhammad Qasim with frolicks and merriment.11
Thus the bulk of population was more or less indifferent to the invasion. In
such a situation it were only Raja Dahir of Sind, his Kshatriya soldiers and
Brahman priests of the temples who were called upon to defend their cities and
shrines, citadels and the countryside. This is the Muslim version and has to be
accepted with caution.
HISTORY OF TILAK JAT
LEGACY OF
MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY K S LAL Page
90
Mahmud was
present with Subuktigin when the latter received the letter of Jayapal, cited
above, emphasising the impetuosity of the Hindu soldiers and their indifference
to death, and the Ghaznavids were convinced of their bravery and spirit of sacrifice.
Years later Hasan Nizami, the author of Tajul-Maasir wrote about them like
this: The Hindus in the rapidity of their movements exceeded the wild ass and
the deer, you might say they were demons in human form.61 Mahmud Ghaznavi
therefore employed Hindu soldiers and sent them, along with Turks, Khaljis,
Afghans and Ghaznavids against Ilak Khan when the latter intruded into his
dominions.62 We learn from Baihaqis Tarikh-i-Subuktigin and from other
histories that even only fifty days after the death of Mahmud, his son
dispatched Sewand Rai, a Hindu chief, with a numerous body of Hindu cavalry, in
pursuit of the nobles who had espoused the cause of his brother. In a few days
a conflict took place, in which Sewand Rai, and the greatest part of his troops
were killed; but not till after they had inflicted a heavy loss upon their
opponents. Five years afterwards we read of Tilak, son of Jai Sen, commander of
all the Indian troops in the service of the Ghaznavid monarch, being employed
to attack the rebel chief, Ahmad Niyaltigin. He pursued the enemy so closely
that many thousands fell into his hands. Ahmad himself was slain while
attempting to escape across a river, by a force of Hindu Jats, whom Tilak had
raised against him. This is the same Tilak whose name is written in the
Tabqat-i-Akbari, as Malik bin Jai Sen, which if correct, would convey the
opinion of the author of that work, that this chief was a Hindu convert. Five
years after that event we find that Masud, unable to withstand the power of the
Seljuq Turkomans, retreated to India, and remained there for the purpose of
raising a body of troops sufficient to make another effort to retrieve his
affairs. It is reasonable therefore to presume that the greater part of these
troops consisted of Hindus. Bijai Rai, a general of the Hindus had done much
service even in the time of Mahmud.63 Thus, employment of Hindu contingents in
Muslim armies, was a heritage acquired by the Muslim rulers in India
RESISTANCE BY RAJPUT JAT AND OTHERS
LEGACY OF
MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY K S LAL Page
241
Ibn Battuta
describes this scenario. The Muslims dominate the infidels, writes he, but the
later fortify themselves in mountains, in rocky, uneven and rugged places as
well as in bamboo groves (or jungles) which serve them as ramparts. Hence they
cannot be subdued except by powerful armies.66 The story of the resistance of
the Hindus to Muslim dominance and injustice is repeated by many contemporary
writers. Ziyauddin Barani says that if the Hindus do not find a mighty sovereign
at their head nor behold crowds of horse and foot with drawn swords and arrows
threatening their lives, they fail in their allegiance, refuse payment of
revenue and incite a hundred tumults and revolts.67 Similar is the testimony of
Amir Khusrau, Ibn Battuta, Vidyapati and the Muslim chroniclers of the
fifteenth century. 68 In the fifteenth century, when the Sultanate of Delhi had
grown weak, the tillers of the soil evaded, more than ever, payment of land
tax, and revenue could be collected only through army sorties in regular yearly
or half-yearly expeditions.69 Such resistance continued throughout, for the
Indian peasant had his own survival strategies. These comprised mainly of two
options - to fight with determination as far as possible, but, if resistance
proved of no avail, to flee and settle down elsewhere. Medieval Indian society,
both urban and agrarian, was to some extent an armed society. In cities and
towns the elite carried swords like walking sticks. In villages few men were
without at least a spear or bow and arrows, and they were skilled in the use of
these arms. In 1632, Peter Mundy actually saw in the present day Kanpur
district, labourers with their guns, swords and bucklers lying by them while
they ploughed the ground.70 Similarly, Manucci described how in Akbars days the
villagers of the Mathura region defended themselves against Mughal
revenue-collecting officers: The women stood behind their husbands with spears
and arrows, when the husband had shot off his matchlock, his wife handed him the
lance, while she reloaded the matchlock.71 The countryside was studded with
little forts, some surrounded by nothing more than mud walls, but which
nevertheless provided centres of the general tradition of rebellion and
agrarian unrest. Armed peasants provided contingents to Baheliyas, Bhadauriyas,
Bachgotis, Mandahars and Tomars in the earlier period, to Jats, Marathas and
Sikhs in the later. But as the people put up a continual resistance, the Muslim
government suppressed them ruthlessly. In this exercise the Mughal emperors
were no better than the pre-Mughal sultans. We have often referred to the
atrocities of the Delhi sultans and their provincial governors. Abul Fazl,
Bernier and Manucci provide detailed accounts of the exertion of the Mughals.
Its summing up by Jahangir is the most telling. In his Tarikh-i-Salim Shahi he
writes: I am compelled to observe, with whatever regret, that notwithstanding
the frequent and sanguinary executions which have been dealt among the people
of Hindustan, the number of the turbulent and disaffected never seems to
diminish; for what with the examples made during the reign of my father, and
subsequently of my own, there is scarcely a province in the empire in which,
either in battle or by the sword of the executioner, five or six hundred
thousand human beings have not, at various periods, fallen victims to this
fatal disposition to discontent and turbulence. Ever and anon, in one quarter
or another, will some accursed miscreant spring up to unfurl the standard of
rebellion; so that in Hindustan never has there existed a period of complete
repose.72
In short,
the avalanche of Turco- Mughal invaders, and the policy of their Government
turned many settled agriculturists into tribals of the jungles. Many defeated
Rajas and harassed Zamindars also repaired to forest and remote fortresses for
security. They had been defeated in war and due to the policy of making them
nest-o-nabud (destroy root and branch), had been reduced to the position of
Scheduled Castes / Tribes / Backward Classes. For example, many Parihars and
Parmars, once upon a time belonging to the proud Rajput castes, are now
included in lower castes. So are the Rajputs counted in Backward Classes in
South India. Two examples, one from the early years of Muslim rule and the
other from its closing years, would suffice to illustrate the point. In the
early years of Muslim conquest, Jats had helped Muhammad bin Qasim in Sind;
later on they turned against him. Khokhars had helped Muhammad Ghauri but
turned hostile to him and ultimately killed him. This made the Turkish
Sultanate ill-disposed towards them, and in course of time many of these Jats
and Khokhars were pushed into belonging to low castes of to-day. For the later
times is the example of the Satnamis. This sect was an offshoot of the
Raidasis. Their stronghold in the seventeenth century was Narnaul, situated
about 100 kms. south-west of Delhi. The contemporary chronicler Khafi Khan
credits them with a good character. They followed the professions of
agriculture and trade on a small scale. They dressed simply, like faqirs. They
shaved their heads and so were called mundiyas also. They came into conflict
with imperial forces. It began as a minor trouble, but developed into a war of
Hindu liberation from the persecution of Aurangzeb. Soon some five thousand
Satnamis were in arms. They routed the faujdar of Narnaul, plundered the town,
demolished its mosques, and established their own administration. At last
Aurangzeb crushed them by sending 10,000 troops (March, 1672) and facing a most
obstinate battle in which two thousand Satnamis fell on the field and many more
were slain during the pursuit. Those who escaped spread out into small units so
that today there are about 15 million Satnami Harijans found in Madhya Pradesh,
Maharashtra, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh.9
MUSLIM MADE JAT MEN AND WOMEN SLAVE
LEGACY OF
MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY K S Page 252
When
Muhammad bin Qasim invaded Sind, he took captives wherever he went and sent
many prisoners, especially women prisoners, to his homeland. Parimal Devi and
Suraj Devi, the two daughters of Raja Dahir, who were sent to Hajjaj to adorn
the harem of the Caliph, were part of a large bunch of maidens remitted as
one-fifth share of the state (Khums) from the booty of war (Ghanaim). The Chachnama
gives the details. After the capture of the fort of Rawar, Muhammad bin Qasim
halted there for three day, during which time he masscered 6,000 men. Their
followers and dependents, as well as their women and children were taken
prisoner. When the (total) number of prisoners was calculated, it was found to
amount to thirty thousand persons (Kalichbeg has sixty thousand), amongst whom
thirty were the daughters of the chiefs. They were sent to Hajjaj. The head of
Dahir and the fifth part of prisoners were forwarded in charge of the Black
Slave Kaab, son of Mubarak Rasti.96 In Sind itself female slaves captured after
every campaign of the marching army, were married to Arab soldiers who settled
down in colonies established in places like Mansura, Kuzdar, Mahfuza and
Multan. The standing instructions of Hajjaj to Muhammad bin Qasim were to give
no quarter to infidels, but to cut their throats, and take the women and
children as captives. In the final stages of the conquest of Sind, when the
plunder and the prisoners of war were brought before Qasim one-fifth of all the
prisoners were chosen and set aside; they were counted as amounting to twenty
thousand in number (they belonged to high families) and veils were put on their
faces, and the rest were given to the soldiers.97 Obviously, a few lakhs of
women were enslaved and distributed among the elite and the soldiers. In the
words of the Andre Wink, From the seventh century onwards, and with a peak
during Muhammad al-Qasims campaigns in 712-13, a considerable number of Jats
[and also others] was captured as prisoners of war and deported to Iraq and
elsewhere as slaves. Some Jat freemen became famous in the Islamic world, as
for instance Abu Hanifa (699-767?), the founder of the Hanafite school of law.
98 So, from the days of Muhammad bin Qasim in the eighth century to those of
Ahmad Shah Abdali in the eighteenth, enslavement, distribution and sale of
captives was systematically practised by Muslim invaders. A few instances are
necessary to have a clear idea of the monstrous practice of taking captives.
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind (near Peshawar) in 1001-02, he took
500,000 persons of both sexes as captive. This figure of Abu Nasr Muhammad
Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud, is so mind-boggling that Elliot
reduces it to 5000.99 The point to note is that taking of slaves was a matter
of routine in every expedition. Only when the numbers were exceptionally large
did they receive the notice of the chroniclers. So that in Mahmuds attack on
Ninduna in the Salt Range (1014), Utbi says that slaves were so plentiful that
they became very cheap; and men of respectability in their native land (India)
were degraded by becoming slaves of common shopkeepers (of Ghazni).100 His
statement finds confirmation in Nizamuddin Ahmads Tabqat-i-Akbari which states
that Mahmud obtained great spoils and a large number of slaves. Next year from
Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin
200,000 captives so that the capital appeared like an Indian city, for every
soldier of the army had several slaves and slave girls.101 Thereafter slaves
were taken in Baran, Mahaban, Mathura, Kanauj, Asni etc. so that when Mahmud
returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist (besides huge wealth)
of 53,000 captives according to Nizamuddin. But Utbi is more detailed. He says
that the number of prisoners may be conceived from the fact, that each was sold
for from two to ten dirhams. These were afterwards taken to Ghazna, and the
merchants came from different cities to purchase them, so that the countries of
Mawaraun-Nahr, Iraq and Khurasan were filled with them. The Tarikh-iAlfi adds
that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the
total number of captives comes to 750,000.102 This was the practice throughout
the medieval period. Furthermore, it was also a matter of policy with the
Muslim rulers and their army commanders to capture and convert, destroy or sell
the male population, and carry into slavery women and children. Ibn-ul-Asir
says that Qutbuddin Aibak made war against the provinces of Hind He killed
many, and returned home with prisoners and booty. 103 In Banaras, according to
the same authority, Muhammad Ghauris slaughter of the Hindus was immense. None
was spared except women and children."104 No wonder that slaves began to
fill the households of every Turk from the very beginning of Muslim rule in
India. Fakhr-i-Mudabbir informs us that as a result of the Muslim achievements
under Muhammad Ghauri and Qutbuddin Aibak, even a poor householder (or soldier)
who did not possess a single slave before became the owner of numerous slaves
of all description (jauq jauq ghulam har jins) 105
JAT AND RAJPUT CONVERT LIVED LIKE
HINDUS
LEGACY OF
MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY K S Page 290
Only one or
two cases of tablighi endeavour may be discussed in some detail. We have spoken
of the Molislams of Gujarat. Molislams or Maula-iSalaam are so called as they
bear the Mohar or stamp of Islam. Else they are Hindus and are known as
Garasiyas. Originally Rajputs, they were converted in the time of Sultan Mahmud
Beghara (1458-1511). They are about two lakhs in number and live mainly in
Bharuch, Kheda and Ahmedabad. Many of the Garasiyas have both Hindu and Muslim
names. They have retained their Hindu customs and traditions. In their
marriages mandap-setting ceremony and garba-type dance are prominent. Their
marriages are performed both by Maulvis and Brahmans. But recently efforts have
been made to wean them away from their Hindu ways and turn them into confirmed
Muslims. Similarly, in Mewat, converts to Islam have ever remained half-Hindu.
Many such converts do not have even Muslim names: they have only Hindu names
like Ram Singh, Ram Din and Jai Singh. Islamic fundamentalists fearing that
some of them might revert to their original faith have organised repeated
preachings to make them into pucca Muslims. Some modern works throw light on
this activity. Shah Muhammad Ramzan (1769-1825) was a crusading tablighi of
Haryana. He found that the converted Rajputs and Jats (Muslim Rajputs and Maula
Jats) were in no way different from their Hindu counterparts in culture,
customs and celebrations of religious festivals. They were not only pir-parast
(Guru-worshippers) and qabrparast (Grave-worshippers); they were also
idol-worshippers. Muslim Rajputs worshipped in Thakurdwaras. They celebrated
Holi, Diwali and other Hindu festivals with zeal and dressed in the Hindu
fashion. Shah Muhammad Ramzan used to sojourn in areas inhabited by such
converted Rajputs, dissuade them from practising Hindu rites and persuade them
to marry their cousins (real uncles daughters which converts persistently
refused to do). They equally detested eating cows flesh. To induce them to eat
beef, he introduced new festivals like Mariyam ka Roza and Rot-bot. On this
day, observed on 17 Rajjab, a pao of roasted beef placed on a fried bread, was
distributed amongst relatives and near and dear ones. Shah Muhammad also
encouraged such people to build mosques in large numbers. Such endeavours have
ruled out the possibility of reconversion and have helped in the Islamization
of neo-Muslims. Curiously enough, this tablighi was killed by his
co-religionist Bohras at Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. Another tablighi, Muhammad
Abdul Shakur, was more vituperative against the prevalence of Hindu customs
among the Muslims. He raved against the barbarous (wahshiana) dress of the
Hindus like dhoti, ghaghra and angia and advocated wearing of kurta, amama,
kurti, pyjama and orhni (or long Chadar). He attacked Hindu marriage customs
practised by Muslims and warned women against participating in marriages with
their faces uncovered. He insisted on women observing parda and was shocked to
find that even after a thousand years of their conversion during the expeditions
of Mahmud of Ghazni, Indian Muslims were living like Hindus. In the end he
exhorted the senior Mewati Muslims thus: Oh Muslims, the older people of Mewat,
I appeal to you in a friendly way, doing my tablighi duty, to give up all
idolatrous and illegal (mushrikana) ways of the Hindus Islam has laid down
rules for all social and cultural conduct follow them.32 Such tablighis are
still busy in their mission in Mewat and other regions. Along with this, fresh
conversions to Islam are also going on from Ladakh to Gujarat and from Kerala
to Assam, creating tensions in society. A report in the Times of India
datelined New Delhi 14 August 1989 says: When Pakistan zindabad slogans were
raised first time on the streets of Leh recently, it came as a shock to the Buddhist
people of Ladakh. Said Mr. P. Stobdan, a scholar from Ladakh now working in
Delhi: For centuries, the Ladakhi Buddhists and Muslims lived together in
harmony. Even intermarriages were common among them. What had destroyed the
secular tradition of Ladakh was the systematic attempt at conversion of
Buddhists to Islam. But above all was the fear of the proselytizing drive which
threatened to eliminate the 84 per cent Buddhists as a religious group. Within
the framework of this new consciousness, according to Mr. Stobden, the Ladakhis
considered themselves to be patriotic citizens of India, the land of the
Buddha. However, because of the policy of appeasement of the Centre towards the
Kashmiris and the consequent neglect of Ladakhis, a sense of disillusionment
was growing among people of the region.
Comments
Post a Comment