5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of

othering Indian Muslims
Stereotypes and biases lead to distorted understandings of the past, which negatively
affects the present and haunts the future.

POLITICS | 7-minute read| 19-05-2017 Print|Close

LUBNA IRFAN @irfan_lubna

On the 477th birth anniversary of the famous Rajput ruler, Maharana Pratap, UP
chief minister Yogi Adityanath gave people "a lesson in history" masqueraded as
an advice.

He argued regarding the nature of the rulers that India had in the past, calling
Akbar and Babur of the Mughal dynasty as invaders, and urged people to follow
Maharana Pratap, Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh as their role models.

While hints of communalisation of history cannot be missed in this argument, he

went on to add to this narrative the fact that a country which does not cherish its
rich history, cannot save its geography.

The definitions of invaders and settlers need to be put into question to

understand our history better. If we go back in history long enough, we'll stumble
upon the Aryans, crossing over the river Indus moving into the land of the seven

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 1/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

rivers along with beginnings of the religious ideals of the to-be majority religion of
future India.

Most historians are of the view that the origin of Aryans lies outside the
geographical limits of what we now identify as India.

The concern here is about the difference between invaders and settlers. If we look
at these people who migrated to the land beyond Indus, starting from the Aryans,
we would see that except for the British, none of the so-called "invaders" had any
other home-country, interests of which they were serving and in the process
harming the land of their settlement.

Most of these settlers were fleeing hostile circumstances and were looking for
home. Indian subcontinent gave them this home. And the settlers reciprocated
this acceptance in innumerable ways.

The multi-cultural existence that has been rendered to India because of the
migrations can now be called the defining feature of the idea of India. The many
things that India boasts about today are mostly from people who came to India
and made it their abode.

To give a few examples, from the Indo-Greeks who ruled India following their
arrival around 200 BC, we have Milinda-Panha, an extensive treatise on
Buddhism; from Rudradaman I (AD130-50), the most famous of the Sakas, who
followed Indo-Greeks to India, we have the first-ever long inscription in chaste
Sanskrit; The Kushanas, who ruled India for the major part of the beginning of
the Christian era, have given us the Gandhara and Mathura schools of art. The list
is endless.

The Mughal dynasty, whose nature of association with India is being put into
question, provides abundant examples of the pluralistic nature of its rulers. Babur
came along and settled in India, establishing his own dynasty. He wasnt Mahmud
of Ghazni, who came, plundered, gained economic benefits from India and left.
Babur came, stayed, ran the country, defended it and enriched it.

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 2/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

Following the battle of Khanua in 1527, Babur made this choice clear to his nobles
and gave leave to all those who wished to go back. Babur not only made his stand
clear, but took steps to consolidate his rule and to become a part of his new
homeland.

He himself writes in his autobiography, Baburnama, that he had started a custom

to eat from Hindustani hands, this can be seen as a clear attempt at getting better
understanding of his new home.

In his memoirs, when he writes about his visit to Gwalior, he not only mentions
the beauty of the palaces of Raja Man Singh and Bikramjit, but he also mentions
in great detail the Hindu temples in Gwalior, and how the sight of these places of
worship was pleasurable to him.

As far as Akbar is concerned, it is evident that this monarch isnt accepted for his
tolerant and progressive leanings by any side of the right. For Hindutva forces,
Akbar is an invader, simply because of his identity of being a Muslim monarch of
a Muslim dynasty.

On the other hand, the Muslim right denounces him as the harbinger of the fall of
the mighty Islamic orthodoxy due to his heterodox and multi-cultural approach.

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 3/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

The Mughal dynasty provides abundant examples of the pluralistic nature of its rulers.

Not surprisingly, in Pakistan, there is no mention of Akbar in history textbooks

from Class 1 to Class 10, as he doesn't fit into the well-defined category of neither
a good Muslim nor a kafir (infidel). Same goes with the Hindu right, which cant
place Akbar in the bad Muslim category, but has to demonise him due to his
Muslim identity.

The problem with the invader rhetoric is that it immediately others the rulers of
the Mughal Empire (having Muslim identity) from the Indian idea, and attempts
at legitimising the othering of the present day counterparts of the same identity.

To outdo this notion of the other", it would suffice here to mention a few things
Akbar left for the country: The economic and administrative excellence of India
was at its peak during the Mughal Empire and the gross domestic product of India
in the 16th century was estimated at about 25.1 per cent of the world economy.

Moreover, Akbar commissioned the translation of several texts of Sanskrit into

Persian, that were mostly of religious nature and included Mahabharata,
Ramayana, Yogavashishtha, Harivamsa, Atharvaveda etc.
http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 4/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

It was only due to Akbars tireless work on Sanskrit and his efforts at keeping the
translations objective that a better understanding of the Hindu religion could be
developed by the Muslim ruling elite and other Persian-reading population. Akbar
was so particular about keeping the translations objective that he reprimanded
Badauni, one of the translators, when he thought that concept of the Judgement
Day was being brought into the translation of Mahabharata by him. Furthermore,
the attempt at developing a common platform in which every religion was
assimilated, if executed properly, might have solved many problems of religious
bigotry.

Following the spiritual religious bent of Akbar, there arose during the reign of
Jahangir, the idea of the religions of Islam and Hinduism being the same. The
influence of the Hindu saint Jadrup Gosain was immense on the emperor,
Jahangir. There was so much communal amity that it was argued by Jahangir that
Jadrup had excellently mastered the science of Bedant (Vedanta), which is the
science of Tasawwuf (Sufism).

The ultimate attempt at bringing about the common grounds of the two religions
of the Indian country was made by Dara Shikoh. The compilation of Majma-ul-
Bahrain, a comparative study of Sufi and Vedantic speculations, by him was an
exceptional work on its own where the name of the book meant mingling of two
oceans, these two oceans being Hinduism and Islam.

The fact that Dara is pitched against his bigot brother Aurangzeb is also
problematic as Aurangzebs actions were politically motivated and myopically
executed. But this doesnt hide the fact that the greatest works on music were
composed during his reign. The list that would piece by piece shatter the
stereotypes against the Mughal rulers of India is endless. If they wouldnt have
thought of India as home, there wouldnt have been such thorough enrichment of
this land by their presence.

Just to give a contrast, one should look at the nature of exploitation undertaken
by the British who came to the richest state of the world and left it one of the
poorest. The harm and hunger with which India was left with, after the British

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 5/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

exited, was very different from the economic condition that prevailed during the
Mughals.

To better understand history, one has to, at any rate learn the differences and
objectively attempt at reading the past, the stereotypes and biases lead to
distorted understandings of the past, which negatively affects the present and
haunts the future.

Also read: We may now have proof Mughals were actually good for
India

Can't say Salman Khan's Tubelight will smash records like Dangal in C

#History, #Yogi Adityanath, #Akbar, #Mughals,

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or
position of DailyO.in or the India Today Group. The writers are solely responsible for any claims arising out of the contents of
this article.

Writer
LUBNA IRFAN @irfan_lubna
Lubna Irfan is a scholar of medieval Indian history
at Centre of Advanced Study, Department of
History, AMU. Her areas of interest are social
history, history of art and architecture and gender
history. She's also a poet.

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 6/7
5/20/2017 Calling Mughals invaders is Adityanath's way of othering Indian Muslims

URL of this article:

http://www.dailyo.in/politics/yogi-adityanath-communalising-history-mughals-akbar-
babur/story/1/17295.html

@ Copyright 2014-2015 India Today Group.

http://www.dailyo.in/single-story.php?id=MTcyOTU= 7/7