-Dr Chandni Sengupta
Abul Hasan Yaminuddin Khusrau, popularly known as Amir Khusrau, has been treated with reverence by many historians. Some have hailed him as an “icon of secularism”, while others have described his works as “masterpieces” of Indo-Persian literature. Wikipedia, the popular online encyclopaedia, has mentioned him as an “iconic figure in the cultural history of the Indian subcontinent”. He has also been referred to as “Tuti-e-Hind” which literally translates as “Parrot of India”. Many titles have been bestowed upon Khusrau who has been eulogized as the “Father of Urdu Literature”, the “Father of Qawwali”, and as the “Inventor of Sitar”. The propagators of the secular narrative have also credited him with the invention of a polycentric language known as Hindavi or Hindustani, the origin and history of which is shrouded in obscurity.
Amir Khusrau, in many ways, epitomized the dichotomous nature of Chishti Sufism in India. While on the one hand, Chishti Sufis like Nizamuddin Auliya, Khusrau’s pir (master), condemned state power and criticized the political machinations of the Sultans, one the other hand, they did not prohibit their disciplines from associating with the upper echelons of society, particularly those who wielded power. Amir Khusrau, the favourite murid (disciple) of Nizamuddin Auliya, was a constant at the courts of the Sultans.
A panegyrist of some repute, Khusrau received continuous patronage from different Sultans of Delhi. His first appointment was at the court of Malik Chajju, Balban’s nephew. A couple of years later, he entered the service of Balban’s son, Bughra Khan, and later also enjoyed the patronage of Bughra Khan’s elder brother, Prince Muhammad, the governor of Multan. The wily Khusrau who had served the prince for five years, feared for his life as Multan was a constant target of the Mongols. He moved to Avadh where he received aid from a wealthy noble, Malik Amir Ali Sarjandar, who was also a benefactor of the arts.
The “Sufi” eventually came to settle in Delhi at the invitation of Muizuddin Kaiqubad. Amir Khusrau became a favourite of all the subsequent Delhi Sultans who extended their patronage to this “Sufi” in lieu of the eulogies he composed for them. He received many favours from Alauddin Khalji and one of his most sought after works, Khazainul Futuh (Treasures of Victory), was composed to celebrate the military campaigns of this cruel monarch. A thorough reading of this text provides ample evidence to contest Amir Khusrau’s “secular” credentials.
Khazainul Futuh is a text which understandably heaps praises on Alauddin Khalji’s military prowess, Khalji being Khusrau’s chief patron. It is also a text which provides insightful details about his hatred towards the Hindus. The attack on the Somnath Temple in Gujarat by the army of Alauddin Khalji is described as an act of establishing the superiority of Islam against the lowly infidels.
The banner of Islam was elevated to the equator, while every arch emerging from the two semi-circles, into which the army was divided, without fail passed its arrow through the black dot of infidelity. So the temple of Somnath was made to bow towards the Holy Mecca… (Khazainul Futuh, 35)
In his description of the arduous battle which Alauddin Khalji fought against Raja Hammiradeva, the Chauhan Sovereign of Ranthambore, Khusrau displayed his antagonism towards the Hindus in unequivocal terms.
The Saturnian Hindus, who are related to that planet, had for purpose of defence collected fire in all the ten towers, thus turning the towers of earth (burj-i-khaki) into towers of fire. Every day the fire of those people of Hell extended its heated tongue to the light of Islam. But as the Mussalmans, men of pure elements, had no means of extinguishing it, they took care of their own water without trying to overcome the fire. (Khazain-ul-Futuh, 39)
Terms such as “people of hell” epitomize Khusrau’s abhorrent disposition towards the Hindus. Raja Hammiradeva of Ranthambore was rightfully defending what was his, however, according to the “great cultural icon”, he was coming in the way of the “the light of Islam”.
Narrating the chain of events that occurred during Alauddin Khalji’s conquest of Malwa, Amir Khusrau describes the plight of the Hindus and their massacre by the forces of Khalji in a rather congratulatory tone. The fierce challenge put forth by Raja Mahlak Deo of Malwa is brushed aside like a flash in the pan.
Streams of blood sank into the ground. So far as the human eye could see, the ground was muddy with blood. The Hindus tried to fly away from the blood-eating earth, yet with eyes full of tears many of them sank in the mire. (Khazainul Futuh, 44)
Describing the manner in which the Fort of Mandu was captured by Alauddin Khalji, Khusrau again displays his undaunting repugnance towards the Hindus who have been constantly referred to as infidels throughout the narrative.
He has to conquer the fort of Mandu by closing up the streams and making breaches in the walls; and when, by the kindness of the “Opener of the Gates”, the place has been conquered, he has to wash away, with the sharpness of his sword, the contamination of infidelity, which sticks to that pagan land as evil intentions stick to the eyes of the rebellious. (Khazainul Futuh, 44-45)
The “plight of the infidels” during the invasion of Siwana (in present-day Barmer district of Rajasthan) by the Islamic army of Alauddin Khalji is also dealt with in great detail by Khusrau in Khaizanul Futuh.
On that day of battle, from the appearance of the false dawn to the last flicker of light the infidels were slain and streams of blood were made to flow. (Khazainul Futuh, 54)
Alauddin Khalji’s conquest of Warangal in the Deccan is also treated in a similar manner by Khusrau. The contempt for the Hindus is distinctly pronounced.
And though the sun, the ‘Mecca’ of the Hindus, looked fiercely at the Mussalmans, the feet of the army threw dust into its eye. Yes, the eye that looks fiercely at such an army deserves no other antimony but black dust. (Khazainul Futuh, 57)
A reading of Khazainul Futuh makes Khusrau’s antagonism towards the Hindus so apparent that it cannot go unnoticed. The text is replete with the term “infidel” which itself is a derogatory reference to the Hindus. The “great” Sufi poet and scholar does not seem so great if one analyses this work thoroughly. What is, however, evident from texts like Khaizanul Futuh is that Amir Khusrau was a narrow-minded bigot who had nothing but contempt in his heart for the Hindus of Bharat.
Primary Source: Khusrau, Amir. Khazainul Futuh (Translated from the original Persian by M., Habib), 1931, D.B. Taraporewala Sons & Co., Bombay
