scorecardresearch
Friday, March 29, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomePageTurnerBook ExcerptsWhy highly placed Muslims became ‘Krishna bhaktas’ in the Mughal period

Why highly placed Muslims became ‘Krishna bhaktas’ in the Mughal period

In ‘Voices of Dissent’, Romila Thapar writes that Rajput-Mughal joint patronage helped make Vrindavan the focus of Krishna bhakti.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

An obvious question is: why did highly placed Muslims, and not inconsequential ones at that, turn their creativity towards Krishna bhakti? Modern historians have called them Muslim Vaishnavas, but they did not call themselves that. They called themselves Krishna bhaktas. Their intention pointed to their identity and possibly reflected far more than religious devotion. It was a cultural indicator of a substantial kind, yet we hardly give it attention. This can be partly explained by the narrowness of the contemporary definition of Indian culture that excludes those aspects that bring in the wider assenting and dissenting dimensions that are inevitable in the creation of any expansive culture.

We often forget that cultures evolve from the interface of many strands in the life of communities and reflect a mixture of many patterns. No culture is singular in its origins. culture assumes a form once the strands are well integrated. We overlook the fact that the Mughal–Rajput alliances had many dimensions apart from the overtly political. For instance, the Kachvaha rajputs of Amber claiming high status as Suryavamsha kshatriyas gave their daughters to the Mughal ruling family who were thought of as turushkas. This contributed to a rajput presence and practices in the Mughal royal family. These would have been viewed by the Muslim orthodoxy as acts of defiance by the non-Muslim, and on other grounds disapproved of by orthodox brahmanas.

The patronage of the Govind Dev temple at Vrindavan with its unusual Indo-Persian architecture strikingly different from the other enormous temples constructed in this period reflected the mixture of rajput and Mughal. This joint patronage doubtless helped to enliven Vrindavan as the focus of Krishna bhakti. This was more than a matter of marriage alliances. It was also making a statement about finding a new identity, giving it form and imbuing it with legitimacy, not to mention its political ramifications. where Krishna bhakti is linked to the patronage of the Kachvahas and the Mughals, there it touches the political culture of both and its activities acquire yet another dimension. Does dissent gradually give way to accommodation when the latter is thought to be politically more expedient?


Also read: Little-known fact: Aurangzeb had more Rajput administrators than Akbar


Puranic Hinduism was now at one level inducting some local dimensions of bhakti and therefore incorporating regional cults that sometimes became sects at other levels. examples of this could be Jagannath in Odisha, said to have had beginnings in tribal worship in the area; Vitthala in Maharashtra, thought to have grown out of the worship of a hero-stone; Hinglajmata in Sind, which has been and is of special importance to nomadic pastoralists and traders; Bonbibi the forest goddess in the Sundarbans, and so on.

To turn to another situation of those times, namely, the view that the Muslim was always the other and qualified by his religion—Islam. Even a preliminary look at the sources indicates that within the structures of Indian society at the time, that which can be labelled as consent or dissent, accommodation or confrontation, are far more complicated matters than we have assumed. This is not a new feature but existed among well-defined communities as we have seen from earlier history. what is important is to recognize the transition towards consent or dissent of varying degree, and to ask what determines the direction.

We use the label of Muslim uniformly today for anything with a touch of Islam. It was used only occasionally in public discourse and then too with particular reference in earlier centuries. What we often overlook is that non-Muslims did not generally refer to Muslims by the single label of Muslim as we do today. In those days, references to them in Sanskrit and other languages were based on a different category of names such as yavanas or Shakas or turushkas. These labels were ethnic and not religious. They also link up interestingly with earlier history. Yavana was used for the Greeks and those who came from the west. So it was used for the Arabs and later for anyone regarded as foreign coming from the west, such as even Queen Victoria. The ancient Shakas were the Scythians from central Asia, the homeland also of the turushkas, the turks. So strong was the association of the turushkas with central Asia that Kalhana, writing in the eleventh century in his Rajatarangini, describes the Kushans coming from central Asia in the early first millennium AD as turushkas. These, therefore, were historically authentic names used for the Arabs, Afghans, turks and Mughals who came from these regions. It also suggests that they were viewed as descended from the earlier peoples as indeed some historically were. The labels of Hindu and Muslim as referring to those identified by uniform monolithic religions came later.

However, some turushkas on occasion are also referred to in Sanskrit sources as mlecchas, used either in a derogatory sense or as just a passing reference to difference. For example, in one Kakatiya inscription from the Deccan, in Sanskrit and telugu, the Delhi Sultan Muhammad bin tughlaq, after a successful campaign in the area, is described by the local defeated raja as a dreadful man who killed brahmanas, destroyed temples, looted farmers, confiscated the land granted to brahmanas, drank wine and ate beef. This was now to become the stereotypical description of a Muslim ruler whenever a negative projection was required. It carries an echo of the description of the kala yavanas / black yavanas of a millennium earlier in the Yuga Purana, when probably the Indo-Greeks were being referred to in an uncomplimentary manner.


Also read: Are communal riots a new thing in India? Yes, and it started with the British


The social distancing of the savarna and the avarna communities was immutable and continued even among those who had converted to Islam or those who had become Sikhs. Theoretically, these religions did not observe caste distinctions, but in effect there was a distancing between erstwhile upper and lower castes.

The exclusion of Dalits continued as conversion did not liberate them from caste. The lowest castes may have been equal to the upper castes in the eyes of Allah, but not in the eyes of the existing upper castes, irrespective of the religion they followed. There is a social message of dissent from the formal social codes in the teachings of the bhaktas from the lower castes and avarnas, which we should listen to.

The Krishna bhaktas who were born Muslim were viewed as the other by two categories of Selves. The qazis and mullahs of orthodox Islam strongly disapproved of them as did orthodox brahmanas. On occasion, the qazi tried to win back the bhakta by resorting to negotiation but this rarely succeeded. It continued until it became helpful to the formal religions to incorporate some of these teachings. Therefore, both the other and the Self have to be carefully defined each time either is referred to in different historical contexts. This might be a necessary exercise in clarifying identities, and more so where there is an overlap.

This excerpt from Voices of Dissent: An Essay by Romila Thapar has been published with permission from Seagull Books.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

115 COMMENTS

  1. Madan Romila thapar, you have mentioned total nonsense in this article. These stories are far away from facts. Muslims have never patronise the vrindvan or Krishna bhakti. The diety ( archa vigrah/ Murti) of Radha Govind Dev temple had to be shifted to Jaipur due to attack and atrocities of Muslims. You can go and have darshan of sri Radha Govind dev at Jaipur now as well. Radha Govind Dev teme was a 5 story temple which was reduced to single story by mughals. Similarly 3 other principle dieties / murtis had to shifted to Jaipur which are still in Jaipur. These Radha gopinathjee , Radha vinodilalajee and Radha damodar jee. Don’t misguide . Anyways nobody except leftist believes you.

    • Not 5 story it is 7 story temple , rest facts are true given by you, The writer is high on weed showing Aurangzeb as friendly creature but writing such nonsense will not change our thoughts about them. Better to teach
      these cheap and falsity to your family Mr. Editor .
      Writer must check his DNA i thing Akbar Chromosomes are there.

  2. In one para it is described the creativity.muslims and creativity are miss-match words.they created either in leisure (from Indian money)or for conversion.

  3. Romila you have manage to decive the hindu’s in the past ,kindly dont try doing it again,you cannot fool us every time.your SICK LEFTIST MINDSET has done enough damage.KINDLY DO SOME SOUL SEARCHING AND STOP YOU MADRASSA PAID WRITINGS !!!ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !!!

  4. Non sense article to hide the atrocities of Islam on Hindus and also try to show them as seculars. Islamic rule was never secular. Islamic rulers always killed Kafir Hindus, raped Kafir ladies and filled their Hareems with Kafir ladies, whenever they wanted and forcibly converted Hindus. They brought slavery system in India and sold Hindus to Turk and Arabic rulers as slaves. It also looted and vandalized temples, demolished Idols in the temples throughout Islamic rule.
    Islam also placed Biased Jizia tax on Hindus, additional land tax on Kafir Hindus. Why didn’t they mention any of those atrocities?.

  5. Romila ji is a well known left historian so much brainwashed and has conditioned mind everything she looks at it from Red glass of marxism.Absolute no respect for Facts and objective analysis.
    Romila ji small piece of friendly advise.Over come your conditionings and see things with open mind and based on truth.
    A few claps missed from your left friends does not matter,in any case it was bloating your ego preventing you to be an authentic person.The moral strength you derive from being open minded and truthful is far more important.
    If you can do this we would have a great historian lest a brilliant mind wasted at Chinese feet.

  6. This writer and her colleagues have been brainwashed by corrupt history written by paid historians soon after Independance.
    Wrong persons were put in charge of Education Ministers and Indian history was distorted under the non believer PM Pandit Nehru. Chacha Ji had no clue about ancient India nor did he believe in Indian culture.
    JNU and sister intelegencia with adulterated mind bend and these historians have ruined our history. To top it all they have grabbed all top positions and do not allow others to get in to upset the apple cart.

  7. It cannot b ignored or hidden that Islam came to north side of India through invasion.But at the same time Islam came to South India more peacefully (arab trading,Cheraman Perumal).This means that not only religious communities have influenced things that happened in the past but also the people ,culture etc.This is also a hint for what is mentioned in this article.
    Swami Vivekananda has once in his speech given in Chicago had told that “Religion is not just tolerance but acceptance”.There is a very good difference between tolerance and acceptance.
    What makesHinduism special is that it supports both acceptance and tolerance when compared to other religions ,where the latter favours tolerance only.Hinduism allows plurality of thought.
    This means that we should leave the past behind.Revenge upon history is not logic.And plurality is not to be dissed.It’s against democracy.It’s against Hinduism.
    If we people of different religion continue to find differences between us and fight for what happened in the past, there is no scope for democracy.
    We should try to find the what is common between us.let’s discuss the differences after that.gghhhj

  8. It cannot b ignored or hidden that Islam came to north side of India through invasion.But at the same time Islam came to South India more peacefully (arab trading,Cheraman Perumal).This means that not only religious communities have influenced things that happened in the past but also the people ,culture etc.This is also a hint for what is mentioned in this article.
    Swami Vivekananda has once in his speech given in Chicago had told that “Religion is not just tolerance but acceptance”.There is a very good difference between tolerance and acceptance.
    What makesHinduism special is that it supports both acceptance and tolerance when compared to other religions ,where the latter favours tolerance only.Hinduism allows plurality of thought.
    This means that we should leave the past behind.Revenge upon history is not logic.And plurality is not to be dissed.It’s against democracy.It’s against Hinduism.
    If we people of different religion continue to find differences between us and fight for what happened in the past, there is no scope for democracy.
    We should try to find the what is common between us.let’s discuss the differences after that.

  9. Sinister design.
    The print, wire etc are Frontpage for such type of self claimed historians who spend all their intellectual prowess to distort & rewrite history according to their very long term agenda. They work on the philosophy that if a lie is told hundreds of times, it will become truth.

  10. Trash. It is Muslims who kill their own kin based on Sharia shitlaws. Illiterate author doesn’t know the status divisions among muslims. And dares to say that all are equal before allah. Another one from a bunch of garbage in the print.

  11. What a mentally retarded woman ! Kindly stop publishing articles when you’re so incapable. Any idiot can make speech now a days. You wasted my ten minutes. Picky lines, biased intentions and convenient approach is all I could read here. Stop bluffing people. This is India and you’re also going to be finished The Print as we won’t accept such media. Quit India retards before we insult you more and kick your ass.

  12. The print
    By letting you publish this article ( many of such kind) , India is setting up a goal for a perfect secular country.

    Imagine now of publishing such anti muslim articles( books by a very tolerant author Romila) in so called liberal “Islamic” countries. Do try this someday.

  13. Here is my crudest simplified interpretation –

    Muslims killed men but wanted to make women {whom they did not sold in slave markets} so that women may make it enjoyable for them in bed & thus they allowed them to practice existing belief system and to appropriate those beliefs for Islamic purpose.

    This is the gist of academic gibberish.

  14. Present day Muslims won’t agree.There are more Hindu historians, intellectuals, politicians in modern India who are ready to rewrite Islamic invassions, loot, plunder and rapes as visitations by saints from Saudi Arabia.Hindus should think more about present day Muslims are planning to do to present day Hindus.Terror attacks to cow slaughter to demographics to love jihad to Gazava e Hind have nothing to do with Islamic past in India.

  15. I still remember the wise words of padmabhushan Mr. Kk Muhammad, the then regional director of ASI, regarding the babari masjid excavation. Mrs. Romila Thapar claimed and reported in alsmost all press meets and articles that there were no temple’s below Baro Masjid, WITHOUT EVEN VISITING THE SITE ONCE. This is the credibility of this Great academic historian. So Mrs. Thapar and her clowns in The print, with due respect, please roll up this piece of crap and shove it up your bum.

  16. An aimless discourse by an aging distorian. What is she trying to say ? Did any Mughal give his daughter in marriage to a Rajput . It was a oneway flow and mughals objective in forcing these marriages upon Rajputs was to safeguard themselves

  17. Suck hypocrites! Shame to you! Even a layman understands you are trying to brainwash and spread fake news amongst us! You mean to say God allah sees everyone equally but Hindu gods don’t, how can you say this? Or compare ? Do you have any proofs supporting the fact? Krishna was born to a royal family but didn’t live with them and rather lived with ordinary people! And you say our god’s discriminated!! Shame on your journalism, you people are a threat to the country and we will try our best to report you every time I see any articles or news from you!

  18. Nice piece, I always wondered why don’t someone talk about it, because we know when someone is at peak,like in present days we dont say “Christian countries”, we say “western countries” or something else, so yes there were all kind of dynamics into the play

    But as always, comments are the one that lightens my mood, lol

  19. There is no homogeneous Hindu.It is caste caste caste. Then subcategories.It is not a unified society,mired in conflict.bickering,hatred,internecine fight .Hence those claim themselves as Hindus belong to so called higher caste. These groups suffer from false ego and expert in exhibiting their courage and valour towards the women and Dalits.

  20. Who were these alleged muslim krishan bhakts ? No name in article. Why ? because they never existed. Even if they existed, they would have been beheaded according to their “holy book”. Again this woke writer is peddling false narrative. Another attempt to prove that all high castes were bad and muslims were saviors of dalits. The truth is thses imported Middle Eastern muslims thought themselves superior than Native Indian Muslims. The native Indian Muslims were killed by these invaders. They never employed native Indian muslims in any jobs and never married amongst them. Everything was done among these foreign invaders only. The so called secular historians have whitewashed the genocide of not only Hindus, Sikhs , Jain’s but Indian muslims also. There was/ is no secularism is Is**m.

  21. All this may very well have been true, but for a long time, Congress and left/liberals have treated Muslims in India as a monolithic vote bank. Today’s right wing back lash is as much about this monolithic political entity as it is about historical violence and carnage.

  22. Indian interaction with Islam was not Just about Mughals as Romila the Historian makes it sound. That my be her focus but this kid of using a broad brush across to characterize the entire interaction is dishonest. Our interaction starts with Malik Kafur!!! Please tell us what he did. Let us look at Ghori,Ghaznavi, the Bahamani Kings. Even among Moghuls, Aurangzeb and the rest were terrible. Romila is losing here place…… this is her desparate attempt to paint a period in India’s history that was very very dark!!!!!!

    Rajputs converting to Islam and still continuing to believe in Krishna!!! That is not much evidence!!!!

  23. The article is a trash representing many untruths and improbables . Another attempts to cover up secularism, hoodwink pseudo intellectuals and waylay common people. Tell straight that they were oppressors of people, destroyer of hindu temples, resorted to forcible conversions, and married to Rajputs girls forcibly for their beauty to humiliate the community and instilling a sense of fear or sometimes for their harems.

  24. This is what the RSS means when it says all Indians are Hindus. Hinduism is the shared composite multicultural strand that the author talks about.

  25. Just assume, I am a Muslim and I am converting some Hindus by murdering, rapeing and looting them. After getting converted to Islam, some of them still fallow Vishnavism; does that makes Islam or Muslims great? What is that writer wants to convey? How come become Muslims great here?

  26. Shekhar Gupta asks for financial contribution to support his journalism. But he is well funded by Congies, with all the loots at their disposal. and he also gets money from Pakistan and Bangladesh to propagate their Islamic agenda, and illegal Muslims’ cause from Bangladesh. With so much money at their disposal, I wonder what Shekhar does with that money.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular