Achievements of Jalaluddin Khalji

1. Early Achievements

A. Excellence in the Military

• Jalaluddin's background was a blend of Turkish and Afghan cultural influences, as his family had been settled in the Helmand Valley (Afghanistan) for two centuries.
• His ancestors migrated to India during Iltutmish's reign and served under the Turkish sultans.
• Jalaluddin joined the army during Balban's rule.
• Impressed by his abilities, Balban entrusted him with the responsibility of protecting the northwestern frontier.
• He showcased his competence in battles against the Mongols.
• Eventually, he attained the position of Ariz-i-Mamalik (Minister of War).

B. Rise in Politics

During the Reign of Kaikubad

• Before his death, Balban had nominated his grandson, Kaikhusrau (son of Muhammad), as his successor. However, after Balban's death, Delhi's Kotwal, Fakhruddin Muhammad, conspired to send Kaikhusrau to govern Multan and made Kaikubad, son of Bugra Khan, the Sultan.
• At the time, Kaikubad was only 17 or 18 years old. Fakhruddin's son-in-law, Nizamuddin (the city official or Dadbeg), took advantage of Kaikubad's youth and pushed him towards indulgence.
• Jalaluddin Khilji was the governor of Samana during this period.
• Nizamuddin became Naib-i-Mamalikat (Deputy of the Kingdom) and assumed control of governance.
• When Bugra Khan, Kaikubad's father, learned of these developments, he marched towards Delhi with a large army. In 1288 CE, Bugra Khan and Kaikubad met near the Ghaghra River in Ayodhya.
• Bugra Khan advised his son to abandon a life of indulgence and get rid of Nizamuddin.
• Acting on his father's advice, Kaikubad initially renounced luxury and ordered Nizamuddin to leave for Multan. When Nizamuddin hesitated, Kaikubad had him poisoned to death.
• With Nizamuddin's death, the administration fell into chaos, and power shifted to two Turkish nobles, Malik Kachhan and Malik Surkha.
• Kaikubad summoned Malik Firoz Khilji (later Jalaluddin Khilji) from Samana and appointed him governor of Baran (Bulandshahr) and Ariz-e-Mamalik, conferring upon him the title of Shaista Khan.

During the Reign of Kayumars

• Jalaluddin’s appointment displeased the Turkish nobles, and the court divided into two rival factions: one led by Malik Firoz Khilji (Jalaluddin) and the other by Malik Surkha.
• Firoz Khilji's faction sought the dominance of new elements, while Surkha's faction aimed to protect the interests of Turkish nobles and restore Balban's lineage.
• Meanwhile, Kaikubad suffered a paralytic stroke. The Turkish nobles took advantage of the situation, enthroned his three-year-old son Kayumars, and crowned him Shamsuddin II at the Nasiri Pavilion.
• Malik Kachhan and Surkha planned to eliminate all non-Turkish nobles, with Jalaluddin being their first target.
• Malik Kachhan personally undertook the task of killing Jalaluddin but failed. Jalaluddin uncovered the conspiracy and assassinated Kachhan.
• Subsequently, Jalaluddin entered Delhi with his army, imprisoned the Sultan and Kotwal Fakhruddin’s children, and proposed that Farukhuddin or Malik Chhajju act as guardians of the Sultan. When both declined, Jalaluddin assumed the role himself.
• Three months later, Jalaluddin had Kayumars assassinated. A Khilji noble wrapped Kaikubad in a sheet and drowned him in the Yamuna River. With this, the Ilbari dynasty came to an end, and the Khilji dynasty emerged.

Accession to the Throne

• At the age of 70, Jalaluddin Firoz ascended the throne on June 13, 1290 CE, in the unfinished palace at Kilokhari (Kilu Ghar) built by Kaikubad. He decided to stay there for a year because the people of Delhi, accustomed to 80 years of Ilbari Turk rule, were reluctant to accept Khilji rule.
• A year later, he moved to Delhi at the invitation of the city’s Kotwal and other officials. Upon arriving, he paid homage to Balban and refused to sit on his throne.
• Addressing the nobles, he emotionally said, “You know that none of my ancestors were rulers, and I have not inherited the pride or glory of kingship. Sultan Balban used to sit here, and I served him. I have not yet abandoned the fear and reverence for that ruler in my heart. This palace was built by Balban when he was Khan, and it belongs to him, his sons, and his relatives.”
• These words deeply impressed the nobles and the people of Delhi.

 2. Policy Achievements: Broadening the Base of Power

• Jalaluddin adopted a policy of appeasing all Turkish nobles. He did not depose all Turks from power but appointed trustworthy individuals to key positions in the administration.

• Malik Chhajju, Balban’s nephew, was appointed as the governor of Kara Manikpur.

• Fakhruddin continued as the Kotwal (chief of police) of Delhi, while Khwaja Khatir retained the position of Wazir (prime minister).

• The Sultan bestowed titles upon his sons: the eldest was given the title of Khan-i-Khanan, the second was titled Arkali Khan, and the third was given the title of Qadr Khan.

• His younger brother was granted the title of Yaghrash Khan and made Ariz-i-Mamalik (chief of the military department).

• Jalaluddin elevated his nephews Alauddin and Almas Beg to high positions and appointed his relative Ahmad Chap as Amir-i-Hajib (chief chamberlain).

• Through his actions, Jalaluddin introduced a new concept of governance that was fundamentally based on goodwill and the support of all communities.

• He avoided unnecessary interference and abandoned cruel policies in governance. Regarding his policies, Barani wrote, "He believed in a policy of not harming even an ant."

• He abhorred bloodshed and sought a peaceful life. A devout Muslim, he opposed the policy of forcibly converting Hindus to Islam or humiliating them.

• While debating with his close associate Ahmad Chap, he supported the Hindus’ right to idol worship, propagate their religion, and perform their rituals.

3. Suppression of Revolts

Malik Chhajju’s Rebellion

• In 1290 CE, Malik Chhajju, the governor of Kara-Manikpur, revolted. He assumed the title of Sultan Mughisuddin, issued coins in his name, and had the khutbah (Friday sermon) read in his honor. The governor of Awadh, Hatim, supported Malik Chhajju in this rebellion.

• With a massive army, Malik Chhajju began advancing towards Delhi via Badaun. In Badaun, Malik Bahadur and Alam Ghazi joined him with their forces.

• To suppress the rebellion, Jalaluddin marched with his army, leaving the capital under the charge of his eldest son, Khan-i-Khanan. His second son, Arkali Khan, accompanied him and led the vanguard of the army.

• Near Badaun, Arkali Khan defeated and captured Malik Chhajju. Chhajju and his associates were brought before the Sultan in chains, dressed in filthy clothes. Moved by their pitiable state, the Sultan pardoned Malik Chhajju and sent him to Multan. All his companions were either released or forgiven.

• Jalaluddin ordered that the defeated nobles be treated with respect. Alauddin was appointed as the new governor of Kara-Manikpur in place of Malik Chhajju.

Jalaluddin’s Generosity

• Jalaluddin was a kind, humble, and compassionate ruler who detested bloodshed. He adopted a lenient policy towards rebels, stating, "I am an old Muslim, and it is not my habit to spill the blood of Muslims."

4. Foiling Conspiracies

A. The Conspiracy of the Nobles

• Jalaluddin's liberal policies awakened the ambitions of the nobles. Mistaking his generosity for weakness, they conspired to assassinate Sultan Jalaluddin during a social gathering and install Tajuddin Koohi on the throne.

• Tajuddin Koohi was a prominent leader of one of the factions during Balban's reign. When the Sultan learned of this plot, he openly challenged the conspirators. Later, their apologies and flattery appeased him.

• The conspirators were merely warned and exiled from the court for one year.

B. The Conspiracy of Siddi Maula

• Siddi Maula was a saint who came from Iran and was a follower of Sheikh Fariduddin Ganj Shakar of Ajodhan. He had settled in Delhi during Balban's reign.

• Siddi Maula ran a large khanaqah (hospice), feeding thousands of hungry people daily. Many nobles and officials, attracted by his influence, began frequenting the khanaqah, where political discussions started taking place.

• The Sultan’s son, Prince Khan-i-Khanan, was also a follower of Siddi Maula. The saint was accused of conspiring, along with two Hindu officers, Hathiyapyak and Niranjan Kotwal, to assassinate the Sultan and make Siddi Maula the ruler. When the Sultan received this information, Hathiyapyak and Niranjan Kotwal were executed, and Siddi Maula was crushed under elephants.

• A few days after Siddi Maula’s death, Jalaluddin's eldest son, Khan-i-Khanan, also passed away.

5. Addressing Disorders: Suppression of Thugs

• Jalaluddin extended his liberal approach even to thieves and thugs. Around 1,000 criminals engaged in theft, robbery, and murder were arrested in Delhi.

• Instead of punishing them, the Sultan placed them on a boat and sent them toward Bengal.

6. Responding to Attacks: Mongol Invasions

• To protect against the Mongols, Jalaluddin appointed Arkali Khan on the borders of Sunam, Dipalpur, and Multan.

• During Jalaluddin's reign, the Mongols, led by Abdullah, attacked in 1292 CE but were defeated.

• A friendly treaty was subsequently established between Abdullah and Sultan Jalaluddin. The Sultan referred to Abdullah as his son, and the Mongols decided to retreat without further conflict.

• However, sometime later, Halaku's grandson, Ulugh, launched an invasion. Later, Ulugh Khan, along with 4,000 of his followers, embraced Islam and decided to settle in India.

• The Sultan granted them permission to stay in India, providing them with accommodation, stipends, and official positions.

• Jalaluddin even married one of his daughters to Ulugh. These Mongols later became known as "Neo-Muslims," and the area where they settled is still famously called Mongolpuri.

7.Military Campaigns of Jalaluddin

Ahmed Chap’s Criticism

• Critique: “If a ruler cannot take strict decisions, he should abdicate his throne.”
• Jalaluddin’s Response: “It is true; idol-worshippers pass right in front of my house with drums and trumpets, and my heart weeps at the sight.”
• He further remarked: “I have never killed any muhaddi (those who deny the oneness of God). What face will I show to Allah on Judgment Day?”

A. Campaign of Ranthambore

• Location: Presently located in the Sawai Madhopur district of Rajasthan, Ranthambore is one of the most strategically important and historic hill forts, surrounded by the Aravalli hills.
• Ruler: At that time, Hammir Dev, a notable ruler, strengthened the Chauhan Rajputs, making them a formidable power.

Campaign Highlights:

• Jalaluddin advanced towards Ranthambore, capturing the fort of Jhain en route and destroying temples.
• Upon reaching Ranthambore, he was deterred by its formidable defenses and abandoned his plan to conquer the fort.

1. • His statement: “The hair of a single Muslim is more precious to me than ten such forts,” signified his decision to retreat without further conflict.
   • Jalaluddin later attacked Mandaur, bringing it under the dominion of Delhi.

B. Campaigns Led by Alauddin Khilji

• Background: Alauddin Khilji (Ali Gurshasp), nephew and son-in-law of Jalaluddin, was appointed as the governor of Kara-Manikpur. Over time, he became central to the political activities of the Sultanate.
• Influenced by Malik Chhajju, Alauddin realized that wealth was essential for a successful rebellion. To amass resources, he led two military campaigns—one against Bhilsa and another against Devagiri.

a. Campaign Against Bhilsa

• Objective: With the Sultan’s permission, Alauddin attacked Bhilsa (in present-day Madhya Pradesh), capturing it successfully.
• Outcome:
  • He looted vast wealth and sent a portion to the Sultan in Delhi.
  • Pleased with Alauddin’s success, the Sultan appointed him as the governor of both Kara-Manikpur and Awadh.
  • The success of this campaign fueled Alauddin’s ambition for power and wealth, as he eyed the throne of Delhi.

b. Campaign Against Devagiri

• Background: During the Bhilsa campaign, Alauddin learned about the wealth and power of Devagiri, a prosperous southern kingdom.
• Strategy:
  • He sought the Sultan’s permission to attack Chanderi but secretly planned to raid Devagiri.
  • In 1296 CE, with 8,000 select cavalrymen, Alauddin marched under the pretense of heading to Chanderi but diverted towards Devagiri.
• Ruler of Devagiri:
  • Ramachandra Dev, a skilled and courageous king, had expanded his kingdom by conquering Malwa and Mysore. His administration promoted trade and agriculture, making Devagiri a wealthy and flourishing state.
• Execution of the Campaign:
  • Alauddin appointed Malik Ala-ul-Mulk as his representative in Kara and proceeded via Chanderi to reach Ellichpur, near Devagiri’s northern border.
  • Spreading rumors that he was seeking employment in the Telangana region after a fallout with his uncle, Alauddin avoided resistance.
  • Upon reaching Devagiri, he launched a surprise attack, catching King Ramachandra off guard.
  • Alauddin spread false information that his army was merely the vanguard of a 20,000-strong main force arriving from Delhi.
  • After a sudden and devastating raid, Alauddin looted immense wealth and returned triumphantly.

Dr. S. Roy’s Comment:

“Delhi was, in fact, conquered in Devagiri, as the gold from the South paved Alauddin’s way to the throne.”

The Assassination of Jalaluddin

• When Alauddin was returning to Kara-Manikpur after looting Devagiri, Jalaluddin was in Gwalior. In Gwalior, he received news about his nephew (Alauddin)'s secret campaign in the Deccan and the wealth he had acquired.

• Ahmad Chap warned the Sultan about Alauddin's ambitions and advised him to stop at Chanderi. However, the Sultan ignored Ahmad Chap’s advice and went to Delhi. Alauddin reached Kara-Manikpur without any hindrance.

• A few days later, Alauddin wrote a letter to his brother Almas Beg (Ulugh Khan), who was in the Sultan’s court, apologizing for his southern campaign and promising to hand over all the wealth to Jalaluddin. However, he stipulated that the Sultan must come to Kara-Manikpur himself.

• He also warned that if the Sultan did not comply, he would either commit suicide or flee to Bengal. Jalaluddin, moved by emotion, decided to go to Kara-Manikpur.

• Jalaluddin traveled to Manikpur via the river route, while his army, led by Ahmad Chap, took the land route. Alauddin crossed the Ganges River from Kara to reach Manikpur, making it difficult for the Sultan's land army to cross the river.

• Almas Beg advised Jalaluddin to meet Alauddin alone, as Alauddin might get frightened by the sight of the army. Falling for this advice, Jalaluddin proceeded to meet Alauddin with a few of his nobles.

• Before reaching the riverbank, at the request of Almas Beg, Jalaluddin and his nobles disarmed themselves. Alauddin met Jalaluddin at the riverbank and fell at the Sultan's feet.

• Jalaluddin lovingly lifted him, embraced him, and, holding his hand, started walking toward the boat. At that moment, on Alauddin's signal, Muhammad Salim attacked the Sultan.

• The wounded Sultan fled toward the boat, exclaiming, "Deceitful Alauddin, what have you done?" Shortly afterward, Alauddin's associate Ikhtiyaruddin severed the Sultan's head from his body.

• On July 20, 1296 CE, after the assassination of Sultan Jalaluddin, Alauddin was declared the Sultan. The severed head of the Sultan was paraded across the borders of Kara-Manikpur and Awadh. Except for Malik Fakhruddin, all of the Sultan’s companions were killed in this event.

Evaluation of Jalaluddin

• Almost all historians agree that Jalaluddin's policy of generosity proved his incompetence as a ruler.

• Barani remarked, "Kingship was a deceit for him."

• In this regard, Dr. K. S. Lal wrote, "Hardly any individual was as unsuitable for the royal crown as the founder of the Khalji dynasty.

• Dr. A. B. Pandey expressed his opinion about Jalaluddin, stating, "Jalaluddin was the first ruler who tried to make generosity the foundation of governance."

 

The Reformation: Material or Spiritual?

The Reformation, one of the most transformative events of the sixteenth century, remains a subject of debate regarding its essential nature. Was it primarily driven by material forces, or was it a deeply spiritual phenomenon? This question has been the focal point of numerous scholarly inquiries, each examining the complex interplay between material and spiritual elements. The following analysis delves into the key historiographical perspectives, tracing the intellectual debates surrounding the Reformation's nature and its consequences.

---

The Problem of the Reformation

The Reformation is a compelling case study for understanding the relative significance of material and spiritual forces in history. As historian Leopold von Ranke once hoped, history might be written “as it actually happened,” but this aspiration proves illusory due to the subjective nature of historical interpretation. Ronald H. Bainton aptly notes that in the case of the Reformation, sources often contradict one another, making it a complex event to analyze. This duality of material and spiritual causes makes the Reformation a rich subject for historical investigation.

---

The Reformation: Religious Expression of the Renaissance?

Wilhelm Dilthey and Ernst Troeltsch Debate

The relationship between the Renaissance and the Reformation has been a topic of contention. Wilhelm Dilthey, a prominent intellectual historian, viewed both movements as interconnected, emerging from a broader European transition toward urbanization, industrial progress, and the rise of the bourgeoisie. Dilthey argued that the Reformation, much like the Renaissance, marked a break from medieval traditions, directing moral energy toward secular work and inner liberty. This alignment contributed to the rise of modernity, challenging ecclesiastical dominance.

Ernst Troeltsch, however, rejected this view. He argued that the Reformation was not a product of the Renaissance but rather a continuation of medieval religious traditions. Troeltsch emphasized its authoritarian ecclesiastical culture, supernaturalist theology, and focus on spiritual rather than material concerns. He saw the Reformation as fundamentally opposed to the Renaissance and minimally contributory to modernity's secular outlook.

---

The Economic Factor: Determinant or Context?

Gordon Walker vs. Hajo Holborn

Economic interpretations of the Reformation gained traction following Max Weber's seminal work, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904–1905). Weber posited a causal link between Calvinist doctrines and the capitalist spirit. However, P.C. Gordon Walker critiqued Weber's thesis, asserting instead that capitalism was the cause of the Reformation. Walker argued that economic conditions, particularly the Price Revolution of the sixteenth century, created the material basis for the Reformation.

Walker identified two phases of the Price Revolution: 1520–1540 (Lutheran Reformation) and 1545–1580 (Calvinist Reformation). He noted that rising prices and industrial expansion reshaped European society, displacing feudal systems and fostering capitalism. The Lutheran phase addressed primary accumulation through the seizure of feudal and ecclesiastical property, while the Calvinist phase disciplined both bourgeoisie and wage-workers for the emerging capitalist order. For Walker, the Reformation was rooted in material conditions, though it employed ascetic principles to instill social discipline.

Contrastingly, Hajo Holborn emphasized the spiritual origins of the Reformation. He argued that Northern Germany, the cradle of Lutheranism, had not undergone significant economic transformations. Instead, Holborn traced the Reformation's roots to earlier religious reform movements like the Rhineland Mystics and the Brethren of the Common Life, which focused on apostolic poverty and personal piety. Holborn dismissed the notion that Luther's theology reflected specific class interests, instead viewing it as a profound spiritual awakening.

---

A Spiritual Phenomenon?

Joseph Lortz and Gerard Ritter

Some scholars regard the Reformation as a fundamentally spiritual phenomenon. Joseph Lortz, a Catholic historian, attributed the Reformation to widespread dissatisfaction with the Church's corruption and calls for reform. He highlighted the role of humanism in shaping the Reformation's intellectual underpinnings and fostering critiques of ecclesiastical authority.

Gerard Ritter focused on the religious fervor in late medieval Germany, where mystic traditions and personal piety flourished. He argued that German popular piety, which sought direct communion with God, clashed with the sacramental and hierarchical structure of the Roman Church. This conflict, intensified by critiques from Erasmus and German humanists, found its voice in Martin Luther, whose theological insights resonated with the German conscience.

---

The Political Determinant

M.C. Lea and the Holy Roman Empire

Political conditions within the Holy Roman Empire also shaped the Reformation. M.C. Lea highlighted the emperor's weakness, the princes' assertiveness, and the rise of cultural nationalism as pivotal factors. The Reformation, according to this view, was not merely a spiritual or material movement but also a political response to the fragmented power dynamics of the Empire.

The role of nation-states in the Reformation underscores its dual nature. The emerging nation-states sought to weaken the Catholic Church's traditional landholdings, aligning with reformist movements to consolidate economic and political power. This interplay of political ambitions and religious reforms underscores the complexity of the Reformation.

---

Psychological or Theological Impulses?

Marc Bloch and Erik Erikson

The psychological dimensions of the Reformation have intrigued scholars like Marc Bloch and Erik Erikson. Erikson's psychoanalytic study of Luther in Young Man Luther examines the reformer's internal struggles and ideological conflicts, presenting the Reformation as a deeply personal journey.

Ronald Bainton, however, criticized Erikson's materialist framework for neglecting the theological essence of Luther's mission. Bainton emphasized Luther's own testimony, which revealed a profound spiritual struggle driven by an intense desire for salvation. For Bainton, the Reformation was inseparable from its theological foundations.

---

A Balanced Perspective

As the Cambridge Modern History aptly summarizes:

"The Reformation of the sixteenth century had its birth and growth in a union of spiritual and secular forces such as the world has seldom seen at any other period of its history. On the secular side, the times were full of new movements......and spiritual forces aimed at making religion the birthright and possession of the common man."

This balanced view acknowledges the dual nature of the Reformation, driven by both material exigencies and spiritual aspirations. The interaction between these forces gave rise to one of history's most transformative movements.

---

Conclusion

The Reformation cannot be confined to a single cause or dimension. It was a complex interplay of material, spiritual, political, and psychological factors. While economic and political conditions provided the backdrop, the movement's theological and spiritual core defined its essence. The Reformation remains a testament to the intricate relationship between human belief systems and the material realities of their time, shaping the trajectory of Western civilization.

The Kingship Theory of Shah Jahan

 

The theory of kingship of Shah Jahan serves as a vivid example of both continuity and change within the Mughal Empire. It was based on the concept of divine kingship established by Akbar, but Shah Jahan adapted it with his personal perspective, administrative style, and the political conditions of his era.

1. Support for Divine Kingship

Shah Jahan defined his kingship as a "divine entity." During his reign, the emperor was considered a representative of God on earth. In a letter to the Sultan of Golconda, Shah Jahan explicitly stated, "The emperor is the shadow of God." Shah Jahan's envoy, Khan Alam, conveyed to the Shah of Iran that Shah Jahan was the "God of the earth." This theory reinforced the divine aspect of his authority, enabling him to maintain supremacy over both the subjects and officials.

2. Cultural Glory and Kingship

Shah Jahan's reign is often referred to as a "Golden Age" by historians. This period witnessed a zenith in art, architecture, and cultural activities. Contemporary Sanskrit scholar Panditraj Jagannath regarded Shah Jahan as more capable and virtuous than other rulers. Depicting the emperor of Delhi as "Jagadishwar" (Lord of the Universe) highlights the cultural and religious significance of his kingship.

3. Administrative Structure and Control

Under Shah Jahan, the nobility and mansabdars displayed unwavering loyalty to the emperor. He effectively controlled rebellions and factionalism. While challenges such as Mahabat Khan's revolt and factional rivalries among the mansabdars occasionally surfaced, Shah Jahan successfully maintained his grip over the nobility and strengthened centralized authority.

4. Religious Policy and Relations with the Ulema

Initially, Shah Jahan's religious policy was orthodox. He took steps to appease the ulema and supported Islamic principles. However, under the influence of Dara Shikoh in his later years, a policy of religious tolerance was reintroduced. Despite this, Shah Jahan believed that the emperor stood above religion and should treat all subjects equally.

5. Succession Struggles and the Decline of Kingship

The later years of Shah Jahan's reign were marked by a bitter succession struggle among his sons. The power struggle between Dara Shikoh, Aurangzeb, Murad, and Shuja destabilized the empire and severely damaged the divine concept of kingship. Aurangzeb ultimately dethroned Shah Jahan and imprisoned him, undermining the very idea of divine kingship.

6. Personal Perspective and Absolutism

Shah Jahan regarded himself as the representative of Allah on earth. He demanded absolute obedience from his officials and subjects. According to contemporary European travelers, Shah Jahan exercised his unlimited power with prudence. Historians like Prof. Saxena and Tavernier opine that Shah Jahan's reign was characterized by administrative stability and a just system of governance.

7. Cultural and Political Achievements

Shah Jahan's era is renowned for architectural marvels such as the Taj Mahal, Red Fort, and Jama Masjid. Travelers like Manucci and Tavernier praised his just rule. They noted that Shah Jahan treated his subjects like a father and prioritized their welfare.

8. Decline of Mughal Kingship and Legacy

The succession disputes and revolts during the later part of Shah Jahan's reign weakened the theory of Mughal kingship. With Aurangzeb's ascension, the empire witnessed an era of rigidity and instability. Nonetheless, Shah Jahan's reign remains a significant period marked by administrative efficiency, cultural prosperity, and affirmation of the divine kingship theory.

Conclusion

Shah Jahan's theory of kingship was an extension of Akbar's policies, blending divine authority, administrative control, and cultural grandeur. However, the succession conflicts in his later years challenged this theory, contributing to the decline of the Mughal Empire. Shah Jahan's kingship stands as a transformative chapter in Indian history, setting new benchmarks in culture, politics, and governance.

शाहजहाँ का राजत्व सिद्धांत

शाहजहाँ का राजत्व सिद्धांत मुगल साम्राज्य की निरंतरता और परिवर्तन का सजीव उदाहरण है। यह अकबर द्वारा स्थापित दैवी राजत्व की अवधारणा पर आधारित था, लेकिन इसमें शाहजहाँ ने अपने व्यक्तिगत दृष्टिकोण, प्रशासनिक शैली, और राजनीतिक परिस्थितियों के अनुसार कुछ बदलाव भी किए। 

1. दैवी राजत्व का समर्थन

शाहजहाँ ने अपने राजत्व को "दैवी स्वरूप" से परिभाषित किया। उसके शासनकाल में बादशाह को पृथ्वी पर ईश्वर का प्रतिनिधि माना जाता था। गोलकुंडा के सुल्तान को लिखे पत्र में शाहजहाँ ने स्पष्ट रूप से उल्लेख किया कि "बादशाह ईश्वर की प्रतिछाया होता है।" शाहजहाँ के दूत खाँ आलम ने ईरान के शाह को बताया कि शाहजहाँ "पृथ्वी का ईश्वर" है। यह सिद्धांत शाहजहाँ की प्रशासनिक शक्ति और अधिकार के दैवीकरण को स्थापित करता है, जिससे वह प्रजा और अधिकारियों पर अपनी सर्वोच्चता को बनाए रखता था।

2. सांस्कृतिक गौरव और राजत्व

शाहजहाँ के शासनकाल को कई इतिहासकार "स्वर्ण युग" मानते हैं। इस समय कला, वास्तुकला और सांस्कृतिक गतिविधियाँ अपने शिखर पर थीं। समकालीन संस्कृत विद्वान पण्डिराज जगन्नाथ ने शाहजहाँ को अन्य शासकों की तुलना में अधिक योग्य और सक्षम बताया। दिल्ली के बादशाह को "जगदीश्वर" के रूप में चित्रित करना इस बात का प्रमाण है कि शाहजहाँ के राजत्व ने सांस्कृतिक और धार्मिक स्तर पर अद्वितीय पहचान बनाई।

3. प्रशासनिक संरचना और नियंत्रण

शाहजहाँ के शासन में अमीर-उमरा और मनसबदार बादशाह के प्रति स्वामीभक्त थे। उन्होंने विद्रोहों और दलबंदी की प्रवृत्तियों पर नियंत्रण रखा। हालाँकि, महाबत खाँ का विद्रोह और मनसबदारों की दलबंदी जैसे घटनाओं ने प्रशासनिक स्थिरता को चुनौती दी। इसके बावजूद, शाहजहाँ ने अमीर-उमराओं पर अपनी पकड़ बनाए रखी और सत्ता के केंद्रीकरण को मजबूत किया।

4. धार्मिक नीति और उलेमाओं के साथ संबंध

शाहजहाँ की धार्मिक नीति प्रारंभ में रूढ़िवादी थी। उसने उलेमाओं को सन्तुष्ट करने के लिए कदम उठाए और इस्लामी सिद्धांतों का समर्थन किया। लेकिन, दाराशिकोह के प्रभाव में, उसके शासनकाल के बाद के वर्षों में धार्मिक सहिष्णुता की नीति वापस लाई गई। हालाँकि, इस्लामी शासन के अधीन, शाहजहाँ का मानना था कि बादशाह धर्म से ऊपर है और प्रजा को समान दृष्टि से देखना चाहिए।

5. उत्तराधिकार संघर्ष और राजत्व का क्षरण

शाहजहाँ के शासन के अंतिम चरण में उत्तराधिकार के लिए उसके पुत्रों के बीच संघर्ष ने मुगल राजत्व के दैवी स्वरूप को गंभीर क्षति पहुँचाई। दारा शिकोह, औरंगज़ेब, मुराद, और शुजा के बीच सत्ता के लिए संघर्ष ने मुगल साम्राज्य की स्थिरता को हिला दिया। औरंगज़ेब ने शाहजहाँ को अपदस्थ कर कारागार में डाल दिया, जिससे दैवी राजत्व की अवधारणा पर प्रहार हुआ।

6. शाहजहाँ का व्यक्तिगत दृष्टिकोण और निरंकुशता

शाहजहाँ अपने आपको पृथ्वी पर अल्लाह का प्रतिनिधि मानता था। वह अपने अधिकारियों और प्रजा से पूर्ण आज्ञाकारिता की अपेक्षा करता था। समकालीन यूरोपीय यात्रियों के अनुसार, शाहजहाँ ने अपनी असीमित शक्ति का विवेकपूर्ण उपयोग किया। प्रो. सक्सेना और ट्रैवर्नियर जैसे इतिहासकार मानते हैं कि शाहजहाँ के शासन में प्रशासनिक स्थिरता और न्यायपूर्ण प्रणाली थी।

7. सांस्कृतिक और राजनीतिक उपलब्धियाँ

शाहजहाँ का काल ताजमहल, लाल किला, और जामा मस्जिद जैसी स्थापत्य कृतियों के लिए प्रसिद्ध है। इसके अलावा, मनूची और ट्रैवर्नियर जैसे यात्री शाहजहाँ के न्यायपूर्ण शासन की प्रशंसा करते हैं। उनका मानना है कि शाहजहाँ ने प्रजा के साथ एक पिता के समान व्यवहार किया और उनके कल्याण को प्राथमिकता दी।

8. मुगल राजत्व का पतन और विरासत

शाहजहाँ के शासनकाल के अंत में उत्तराधिकार संघर्ष और विद्रोहों ने मुगल साम्राज्य के राजत्व सिद्धांत को कमजोर कर दिया। औरंगज़ेब के सत्ता में आने के बाद मुगल साम्राज्य में कठोरता और अस्थिरता बढ़ी। हालाँकि, शाहजहाँ का शासनकाल प्रशासनिक दक्षता, सांस्कृतिक समृद्धि, और दैवी राजत्व सिद्धांत की पुष्टि के लिए एक महत्वपूर्ण कालखंड बना रहा।

निष्कर्ष

शाहजहाँ का राजत्व सिद्धांत अकबर की नीतियों का विस्तार था, जिसमें दैवी स्वरूप, प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण, और सांस्कृतिक गौरव का मिश्रण था। हालाँकि, उनके शासनकाल के अंतिम वर्षों में उत्तराधिकार संघर्ष ने इस सिद्धांत को चुनौती दी, जो मुगल साम्राज्य के पतन का कारण बना। शाहजहाँ का राजत्व भारतीय इतिहास में एक युगांतरकारी अध्याय है, जिसने संस्कृति, राजनीति, और प्रशासन के क्षेत्र में नए मानदंड स्थापित किए।

The Theory of Kingship of Jahangir

Jahangir not only adopted the divine theory of kingship propounded by his father Akbar but also expanded it further. His concept was that the king is chosen by God, and only the person deemed worthy is elevated to this position. In Tuzuk-e-Jahangiri, he explicitly stated that kingship and governance cannot be granted by rebels or any other force. This ideology was reflected in his major decisions and policies.

Symbolic Importance of Light

Jahangir deepened the divine aspect of kingship by adopting the title Nur-ud-Din and naming his cherished possessions with terms associated with light, such as:

• Naming his queen Nur Mahal and Nur Jahan.
• Naming his favorite horse Nur-e-Asp and his elephant Nur-e-Fil.

This symbolism highlighted the spiritual and emblematic facets of Jahangir’s rule.

Dealing with Rebellions and Protecting Kingship

During Jahangir’s reign, two significant rebellions occurred: the rebellion of Khusrau and the rebellion of Shah Jahan. Jahangir maintained the divine nature of his kingship while dealing with these uprisings.

• Khusrau’s Rebellion: Jahangir suppressed it ruthlessly, perceiving it as a test of his divine power.
• Shah Jahan’s Rebellion: This ended with conditional forgiveness and compliance with royal decrees, demonstrating loyalty to the Mughal kingship and acceptance of the divine principle.

Balancing Tolerance and Orthodoxy

Jahangir adopted Akbar’s policy of Sulh-e-Kul (universal tolerance), while also initially attempting to appease orthodox ulemas.

• Tolerance: Jahangir is regarded in contemporary texts as a follower of Akbar's traditions.
• Control over the Ulemas: Instead of promoting orthodox ideologies, Jahangir maintained control over them.

Justice: A Pillar of Popularity

Jahangir was seen as a just ruler. He hung a chain of justice outside his palace, symbolizing the accessibility of justice. Though it remains debatable whether it was truly available to the common people, it reinforced public trust in law and justice.

Approach Towards Rebel Groups

Jahangir sentenced Sikh Guru Arjan to death for supporting the rebel Khusrau, justifying it under the divine principles of the state and justice. Similarly, other rebellious groups, such as the followers of Shvetambara Jain guru Man Singh, were also punished.

Administrative Decisions and Divine Principles

Jahangir awarded the title of Shah to Prince Khurram (later Shah Jahan) for his campaigns in the Deccan, emphasizing the superiority of the Mughal Empire’s authority over the southern states. This decision aligned with his divine theory, which regarded the king’s position as God-given and supreme.

Conclusion

Jahangir infused his reign with divine principles and symbolism while preserving Akbar's traditions. Through justice, religious tolerance, and administrative acumen, he solidified his position. His reign, evaluated through contemporary contexts and principles, reflects a blend of divine authority and practical politics, providing stability to the Mughal Empire from a modern perspective.

जहाँगीर का राजत्व का सिद्धांत

जहाँगीर ने अपने पिता अकबर द्वारा प्रतिपादित राजत्व के दैवी सिद्धांत को न केवल अपनाया, बल्कि इसे और अधिक विस्तार दिया। उसकी यह अवधारणा थी कि राजा का चयन ईश्वर करता है और उसे वही व्यक्ति बनाया जाता है जो इस पद के लिए योग्य होता है। तुज़क-ए-जहाँगीरी में उसने स्पष्ट रूप से कहा है कि राजत्व और शासन विद्रोहियों या किसी अन्य शक्ति के द्वारा नहीं दिए जा सकते। यह विचारधारा उसके शासन के प्रमुख निर्णयों और उसकी नीतियों में परिलक्षित होती है।

प्रकाश का प्रतीकात्मक महत्व

जहाँगीर ने 'नूरुद्दीन' नाम धारण करके और अपनी प्रिय वस्तुओं को 'नूर' से सम्बंधित नाम देकर राजत्व के दैवी स्वरूप को और अधिक गहराई प्रदान की। जैसे:

• अपनी पटरानी को 'नूरमहल' और 'नूरजहाँ' का नाम दिया।
• अपने प्रिय घोड़े का नाम 'नूर-ए-अस्प' और हाथी का नाम 'नूर-ए-फिल' रखा। यह प्रतीकात्मकता जहाँगीर के शासन के आध्यात्मिक एवं प्रतीकात्मक पहलुओं को उजागर करती है।

विद्रोहों का सामना और राजत्व की रक्षा

जहाँगीर के शासनकाल में दो प्रमुख विद्रोह हुए: खुसरो का विद्रोह और शाहजहाँ का विद्रोह। इन विद्रोहों का सामना करते हुए उसने अपने राजत्व के दैवी स्वरूप को बनाए रखा।

• खुसरो का विद्रोह: जहाँगीर ने इसे निर्ममता से दबा दिया और इसे अपनी दैवी शक्ति की परीक्षा के रूप में देखा।
• शाहजहाँ का विद्रोह: इस विद्रोह का अंत सशर्त क्षमा और राजकीय आदेश के पालन के रूप में हुआ। यह मुगल राजत्व के प्रति वफादारी और दैवी सिद्धांत की स्वीकार्यता को दर्शाता है।

 सहिष्णुता और रूढ़िवाद का संतुलन

जहाँगीर ने अकबर की सुलहकुल नीति की प्रशंसा करते हुए सहिष्णुता की नीति अपनाई, लेकिन प्रारंभिक काल में रूढ़िवादी उलेमाओं को प्रसन्न करने का प्रयास भी किया।

• सहिष्णुता: जहाँगीर को समकालीन ग्रंथों में अकबर की परंपरा का अनुयायी माना गया है।
• उलेमाओं का नियंत्रण: उसने रूढ़िवादी विचारधाराओं को बढ़ावा देने के बजाय उन पर नियंत्रण बनाए रखा।

 न्यायप्रियता: जनता में लोकप्रियता का आधार

जहाँगीर को एक न्यायप्रिय शासक के रूप में देखा गया। उसने अपने महल के बाहर न्याय की जंजीर लटकाई, जो न्याय की उपलब्धता का प्रतीक बनी। हालांकि, यह विवादास्पद है कि क्या यह आम जनता के लिए सुलभ थी, लेकिन इसने कानून और न्याय के प्रति विश्वास को बढ़ावा दिया।

विद्रोही गुटों के प्रति दृष्टिकोण

जहाँगीर ने सिख गुरु अर्जुन को विद्रोही खुसरो का समर्थन देने के कारण मृत्युदंड दिया। उसने इसे राज्य के दैवी सिद्धांत और न्याय के तहत उचित ठहराया। इसी प्रकार, अन्य विद्रोही गुटों जैसे श्वेताम्बर जैन गुरु मानसिंह के अनुयायियों को भी दंडित किया गया।

प्रशासनिक निर्णय और दैवी सिद्धांत

जहाँगीर ने दक्षिण के अभियान के लिए राजकुमार खुर्रम (शाहजहाँ) को शाह की उपाधि देकर यह स्पष्ट किया कि मुगल साम्राज्य के पद और अधिकार दक्षिणी राज्यों से श्रेष्ठ हैं। यह निर्णय उसके दैवी सिद्धांत के अनुरूप था, जिसमें बादशाह का पद ईश्वर प्रदत्त और सर्वोच्च माना गया।

निष्कर्ष

जहाँगीर ने अकबर की परंपराओं को बनाए रखते हुए अपने शासनकाल को दैवी सिद्धांतों और प्रतीकवाद से जोड़ा। उसने न्यायप्रियता, धार्मिक सहिष्णुता, और प्रशासनिक कुशलता के माध्यम से अपनी स्थिति को मजबूत किया। उसके शासनकाल का मूल्यांकन, तात्कालिक संदर्भों और उसके सिद्धांतों के आधार पर किया जाना चाहिए। आधुनिक दृष्टिकोण से, जहाँगीर का शासन दैवी अधिकार और व्यावहारिक राजनीति का मिश्रण था, जिसने मुगल साम्राज्य को स्थायित्व प्रदान किया।

वाद-विवाद: 75 वर्षों बाद संविधान — क्या यह एक समृद्ध इतिहास वाली और निरंतर प्रगतिशील राष्ट्र की आवश्यकताओं को पूरा करता है, या इसका दायरा सीमित है?

                              पहला दृष्टिकोण 

संविधान सभ्यता के साथ सामंजस्य नहीं रखता - जे साई दीपक

यह विश्लेषण आधुनिक भारत में सभ्यतागत पहचान और संवैधानिक नैतिकता के बीच एक गहरी और विचारोत्तेजक टकराव को उजागर करता है। यह उपनिवेशकालीन विचारधारा की ऐतिहासिक निरंतरता और इसे स्वतंत्र भारत के संवैधानिक ढांचे में शामिल करने की आलोचना करता है। साथ ही, यह संवैधानिकता को सभ्यतागत चेतना से ऊपर रखने की प्रभावशीलता और उद्देश्य पर सवाल उठाता है।

1. सभ्यता और संविधान के बीच टकराव

"जय श्री राम" और "जय संविधान" जैसे नारों का एक साथ आना भारत में सभ्यतागत पहचान और संवैधानिक ढांचे के बीच एक गहरे संघर्ष का प्रतीक है। यह संघर्ष नया नहीं है, लेकिन आधुनिक समय में अधिक स्पष्ट हुआ है। यह भारत की परंपराओं और संवैधानिक आदर्शों, जिन्हें अक्सर उपनिवेशकालीन विरासत माना जाता है, के बीच सामंजस्य की कमी को दर्शाता है।

मुख्य बिंदु:

• लेख यह सुझाव देता है कि राजनीतिक स्वतंत्रता ने मनोवैज्ञानिक या सांस्कृतिक स्वतंत्रता प्रदान नहीं की।
• इसके विपरीत, स्वतंत्रता के बाद भारतीय राज्य ने "संवैधानिक नैतिकता" के आवरण में औपनिवेशिक दृष्टिकोण को और गहराई से स्थापित किया।
• धर्मनिरपेक्षता और अन्य प्रांभिक मूल्यों को अपनाने का उद्देश्य स्थानीय पहचान को सुधारने या समाप्त करने के लिए था, जिससे भारत की सभ्यतागत जड़ों और राजनीतिक ढांचे के बीच संबंध टूट गया।

2. स्वतंत्र भारत को आकार देने में औपनिवेशिक निरंतरता की भूमिका

संवैधानिक नैतिकता के रूप में औपनिवेशिक दृष्टिकोण की स्थिरता ने भारत की स्वदेशी पहचान से एक अलगाव में योगदान दिया है। इसे अक्सर प्रगतिशील मानकर सराहा गया है, लेकिन इसे देश के सभ्यतागत मूल्यों को कमजोर करने के साधन के रूप में भी देखा गया है।

मुख्य तर्क:

• औपनिवेशिक परियोजना का उद्देश्य भारत को उसकी जड़ों से अलग करना था, और स्वतंत्र राज्य ने इस प्रयास को विडंबना से और गहरा किया।
• इस ढांचे को चुनौती देने या उपनिवेशमुक्ति पर चर्चा करने का कोई भी प्रयास साम्प्रदायिक या संविधान-विरोधी करार दिया जाता है।
• "नागरिक राष्ट्रवाद," जो संविधान के प्रति निष्ठा को सभ्यतागत चेतना से अधिक महत्व देता है, को स्वीकार्य राष्ट्रवाद का एकमात्र रूप बताया जाता है।

3. सभ्यतागत चेतना बनाम नागरिक राष्ट्रवाद

यह निबंध इस धारणा की आलोचना करता है कि संवैधानिकता पर आधारित नागरिक राष्ट्रवाद धर्म, संस्कृति और भाषा जैसे लंबे समय से चले आ रहे पहचान के प्रतीकों को प्रतिस्थापित कर सकता है। ये पारंपरिक प्रतीक सहस्राब्दियों से समूह निर्माण और सभ्यतागत निरंतरता में सहायक रहे हैं।

प्रमुख उठाए गए सवाल:

• क्या नागरिक राष्ट्रवाद भारत जैसे गहराई से जुड़ी सभ्यता में पारंपरिक सभ्यतागत प्रतीकों को वास्तव में प्रतिस्थापित कर सकता है?
• यदि ऐसा होता है, तो क्या यह समाज को उसकी पहचान और सामूहिक स्मृति से वंचित नहीं कर देगा, जिससे वह बाहरी प्रभावों के प्रति कमजोर हो जाएगा?
• क्या धर्मनिरपेक्ष नागरिक राष्ट्रवाद के समर्थक जानबूझकर ऐतिहासिक स्मृतिलोप को बढ़ावा दे रहे हैं ताकि समाज की जीवित रहने की प्रवृत्ति को कमजोर किया जा सके?

4. ऐतिहासिक स्मृतिलोप और इसके परिणाम

वर्तमान बांग्लादेश का उदाहरण देकर लेखक तर्क करता है कि सामूहिक स्मृति और इतिहास की समझ का नुकसान सामाजिक एकता और अस्तित्व के लिए गंभीर परिणाम दे सकता है। यह निबंध समुदाय और सभ्यतागत चेतना को एक अपरिवर्तनीय संवैधानिक ढांचे की तुलना में अधिक महत्व देने की आवश्यकता पर जोर देता है।

मुख्य अंतर्दृष्टि:

• ऐतिहासिक स्मृतिलोप और सभ्यतागत चेतना का क्षरण समाज को उसकी जीवित रहने की प्रवृत्ति से वंचित कर सकता है।
• संविधान को समाज की आवश्यकताओं और पहचान से ऊपर रखना उचित नहीं है, क्योंकि इससे भविष्य की पीढ़ियों की अपनी नियति को फिर से परिभाषित करने की क्षमता बाधित हो सकती है।

5. संविधान और भारत की बहुलतावादिता

यह निबंध इस धारणा को चुनौती देता है कि केवल भारतीय संविधान ने भारत की बहुलतावादी संरचना को बनाए रखा है और इसे पाकिस्तान और बांग्लादेश जैसे अराजकता से बचाया है। इसके विपरीत, यह तर्क देता है कि भारत के लोगों की धार्मिक नैतिकता ने देश की बहुलवादी संरचना और संवैधानिक संस्थानों के प्रति सम्मान बनाए रखा है।

संवैधानिक सर्वोच्चता की आलोचना:

• पड़ोसी देशों में संविधान की उपस्थिति ने तख्तापलट या अल्पसंख्यकों के उत्पीड़न को नहीं रोका।
• भारत का विशिष्ट कारक इसकी धार्मिक नैतिकता है, जो स्वाभाविक रूप से बहुलवाद को महत्व देती है और संवैधानिक संस्थानों का सम्मान करती है, न कि केवल संविधान का।

6. सभ्यतागत पहचान और संवैधानिक लक्ष्यों में सामंजस्य

निबंध का निष्कर्ष यह है कि सभ्यतागत चेतना और संवैधानिकता के लक्ष्यों के बीच संतुलन बनाना आवश्यक है। यह समाज की आत्म-चेतना को बनाए रखने के महत्व पर जोर देता है, जबकि इसे वर्तमान और भविष्य की जरूरतों के लिए अनुकूल बनाने की आवश्यकता है।

प्रस्तावित दृष्टिकोण:

• सामुदायिक पहचान और सामाजिक एकता को आकार देने में सभ्यतागत प्रतीकों के महत्व को पहचानें।
• संविधान को अपरिवर्तनीय या पवित्र मानने से बचें, ताकि यह सभ्यतागत मूल्यों के साथ विकसित हो सके।
• संवैधानिकता की एक सूक्ष्म समझ को बढ़ावा दें, जो भारत के सभ्यतागत मूल्यों के साथ संघर्ष के बजाय पूरक हो।

निष्कर्ष

यह आलोचना भारत में सभ्यतागत पहचान और संवैधानिक नैतिकता के बीच चल रहे संघर्ष पर एक शक्तिशाली चिंतन प्रदान करती है। यह दोनों के बीच संबंध को फिर से परिभाषित करने का आह्वान करती है, उपनिवेशकालीन विरासत से दूर जाने और शासन के सिद्धांतों के साथ सभ्यतागत चेतना को सामंजस्य स्थापित करने की दिशा में। ऐसा करके, भारत अपनी समृद्ध बहुलतावादी परंपरा को संरक्षित कर सकता है और एक ऐसा मार्ग तैयार कर सकता है जो इसके अतीत का सम्मान करता हो और इसके भविष्य को अपनाता हो।

                                          दूसरा दृष्टिकोण

यह भविष्य की ओर देखता है, सभ्यता में निहित - फैज़ान मुस्तफा

यह विश्लेषण भारतीय संविधान, इसके सभ्यतागत संदर्भ और इसकी आलोचनाओं पर केंद्रित बदलते विमर्श को संबोधित करता है। यह संविधान की समावेशिता की सराहना और भारत की सभ्यतागत धरोहर से इसके कथित विच्छेदन के बीच झूलते विचारों को प्रस्तुत करता है। यहां प्रमुख बिंदुओं पर एक विस्तृत चिंतन दिया गया है:

1. संविधान: एक जीवित धारा

प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी का यह कथन कि संविधान "एक जीवित, सतत बहने वाली धारा" है, संविधान की अनुकूलता और एक प्रगतिशील राष्ट्र की आकांक्षाओं को दर्शाने की इसकी भूमिका के विचार से मेल खाता है। हालांकि, विशेष रूप से हिंदुत्व समूह के भीतर से आने वाले विरोधाभासी स्वर वैचारिक मतभेद को उजागर करते हैं।

विरोधाभासी दृष्टिकोण:

• कुछ लोग संविधान को औपनिवेशिक थोपने के रूप में देखते हैं जो भारत की सभ्यता से इसके संबंधों को तोड़ देता है, जबकि आरएसएस प्रमुख जैसे अन्य लोग तर्क देते हैं कि हिंदुत्व संवैधानिक आदर्शों को प्रतिबिंबित करता है।
• यह दोहरापन या तो विविध वर्गों को साधने की एक सोची-समझी नीति को दर्शाता है या संविधान के मूल्य को लेकर वास्तविक भ्रम को।

2. संविधान सभा में सभ्यतागत संदर्भ

जो आलोचक यह दावा करते हैं कि संविधान भारत की सभ्यतागत पहचान को कमजोर करता है, वे संविधान सभा में भारत की प्राचीन संस्कृति और परंपराओं के बार-बार उल्लेख को नज़रअंदाज़ करते हैं। नेहरू द्वारा निर्देशित उद्देश्य प्रस्ताव ने भारत की 5,000 साल पुरानी सभ्यतागत यात्रा और आधुनिकता में इसके संक्रमण को स्वीकार किया।

मुख्य अंतर्दृष्टि:

• पुरुषोत्तम दास टंडन और कृष्ण सिंह जैसे नेताओं ने सभ्यता और राष्ट्र-राज्य के द्वंद्व को खारिज करते हुए निरंतरता पर जोर दिया।
• जनसंघ के संस्थापक श्यामा प्रसाद मुखर्जी ने स्वीकार किया कि संविधान अपनी वैधता भारतीय लोगों से प्राप्त करता है, न कि उपनिवेशवादियों से।

3. स्वदेशी पहचान और इसकी जटिलता

यह धारणा कि संविधान भारत की स्वदेशी पहचान की उपेक्षा करता है, अत्यधिक सरल है। भारत में स्वदेशी पहचान बहुआयामी है, जिसमें न केवल आर्य बल्कि आदिवासी परंपराएं भी शामिल हैं। संविधान सभा में जसपाल सिंह द्वारा प्रस्तुत आदिवासी दृष्टिकोण ने आर्य वर्चस्व की धारणा को चुनौती दी और आधुनिक संवैधानिकता से पहले आदिवासी समुदायों की लोकतांत्रिक प्रथाओं को रेखांकित किया।

4. संवैधानिक नैतिकता और धर्मिक आचार

आलोचक अक्सर संवैधानिक नैतिकता को भारत की परंपराओं के प्रतिकूल मानते हैं, जैसे सबरीमाला (2017) के फैसले का उदाहरण देते हुए। हालांकि, भारतीय सभ्यता की एक व्यापक समझ कुछ और ही दर्शाती है।

विपरीत तर्क:

• अशोक का धम्म: संवैधानिक नैतिकता के एक रूप के रूप में देखा गया, यह धार्मिक थोपने के बजाय धार्मिकता (धर्म) को बढ़ावा देता है और धर्मनिरपेक्ष सिद्धांतों के साथ मेल खाता है।
• हिंदू महासभा का संविधान: इसके 1944 के मसौदे ने स्पष्ट रूप से राज्य धर्म को खारिज कर दिया, जिससे धर्मनिरपेक्षता को एक प्रारंभिक स्वीकृति मिली, जो संभवतः भारतीय संविधान से अधिक स्पष्ट थी।

5. भारतीय संविधान में उधारी और नवाचार

भारतीय संविधान के निर्माताओं ने वैश्विक परंपराओं से उधार लेकर उन्हें भारत की विशिष्ट जरूरतों के अनुसार ढालने का संतुलन बनाया।

उदाहरण:

• संसदीय लोकतंत्र: ब्रिटेन से अनुकूलित, लेकिन एक गणराज्य ढांचे के साथ।
• मौलिक अधिकार: अमेरिका से उधार लिए गए, लेकिन भारतीय वास्तविकताओं के अनुसार प्रतिबंधों के साथ।
• कार्यात्मक पृथक्करण: शक्तियों के कठोर पृथक्करण के बजाय, संविधान ने कार्यात्मक पृथक्करण को अपनाया, जो लक्ष्मण रेखा के सिद्धांत के अनुरूप है।

6. ऐतिहासिक कमियां और सामाजिक वास्तविकताएं

भारत का अतीत, हालांकि गौरवशाली, जाति व्यवस्था और लैंगिक असमानताओं से उपजी विषमताओं से प्रभावित था। हंसा मेहता जैसे नेताओं ने प्राचीन भारत में महिलाओं की असमान स्थिति पर विस्तार से बात की। इन विषमताओं को संबोधित करने के लिए व्यक्तिगतता जैसी पश्चिमी विचारधाराओं को अपनाना एक सचेत विकल्प था।

7. संविधान: भविष्य की ओर देखने वाला दस्तावेज़

संविधान, अपने डिजाइन के अनुसार, भविष्य के लिए एक एजेंडा तय करता है। जबकि यह भारत के सभ्यतागत लोकाचार में निहित है, इसने कट्टरवाद से बचते हुए विविधता, सहिष्णुता और स्वीकृति जैसे मूल्यों को अपनाया।

दर्शनशास्त्रीय दृष्टिकोण:

• वसुधैव कुटुंबकम् (संपूर्ण विश्व एक परिवार है) वैश्विक परंपराओं से विचारों को अपनाने को उचित ठहराता है।
• अतीत से सीखना महत्वपूर्ण है, लेकिन इसे अनावश्यक रूप से आदर्श मानना या पुनर्जीवित करने की इच्छा प्रतिगामी परिणाम दे सकती है।

8. आगे का रास्ता

यह लेख एक संतुलित दृष्टिकोण की वकालत करता है जो:

• संविधान को एक गतिशील दस्तावेज़ के रूप में पहचानता है, जो सभ्यतागत निरंतरता और आधुनिक आकांक्षाओं को दर्शाता है।
• समावेशिता, विविधता और प्रगति पर जोर देता है, जबकि भारत की ऐतिहासिक पहचान को नजरअंदाज नहीं करता।
• संविधानवाद को सभ्यता के लिए खतरे के रूप में देखने वाले संकीर्ण आलोचकों को चुनौती देता है।

निष्कर्ष

भारतीय संविधान सभ्यतागत धरोहर और आधुनिक शासन के बीच अंतःक्रिया का प्रमाण है। जबकि यह वैश्विक विचारों से प्रेरित है, यह बहुलवाद और सहिष्णुता के उस लोकाचार में गहराई से निहित है जो भारतीय सभ्यता को परिभाषित करता है। आलोचकों को संविधान को उपनिवेशवाद के अवशेष के रूप में नहीं, बल्कि एक जीवंत ढांचे के रूप में देखना चाहिए, जो राष्ट्र के साथ विकसित होने में सक्षम है।

Debate: As the Constitution turns 75, a question is: Does it embody and satisfy the needs of a nation with a rich history, and one that is on the move, or does it have a circumscribed ambit?

                                     1^st   Perspective

Constitution is not at ease with civilization - J Sai Deepak

This analysis captures a deeply thought-provoking tension between civilisational identity and constitutional morality in contemporary Bharat. It critiques the historical continuity of colonial thought into the framework of post-colonial India and raises questions about the efficacy and intent of placing constitutionalism above civilisational consciousness. Here's a detailed reflection on the key ideas presented:

1. The Tussle Between Civilisation and Constitution

The juxtaposition of slogans like "Jai Shri Ram" and "Jai Samvidhan" symbolizes a deeper conflict between civilisational identity and constitutional frameworks in India. This conflict is not new but has been accentuated in modern times, reflecting an inherent unease in reconciling Bharatiya traditions with constitutional ideals that are often seen as rooted in colonial legacies.

Key Points:

• The article suggests that political independence did not result in a psychological or cultural decolonisation.
• Instead, the Indian state, post-independence, entrenched colonial attitudes under the garb of "constitutional morality."
• The adoption of secularism and other preambular values aimed to reform or suppress the native identity, severing the connection between Bharat's civilisational roots and its political framework.

2. The Role of Colonial Continuity in Shaping Post-Independence India

The persistence of colonial condescension in the form of constitutional morality has contributed to a disconnection from Bharat’s indigenous identity. This moral framework, while often heralded as progressive, is portrayed as an instrument to dilute the civilisational ethos of the country.

Key Arguments:

• The colonial project aimed at rendering India rootless; the independent state, ironically, amplified this effort.
• Any attempt to challenge this framework or talk of decolonisation is dismissed as communal or anti-Constitutional.
• Civic nationalism, which prioritises allegiance to the Constitution over civilisational consciousness, is upheld as the only acceptable form of nationalism.

3. Civilisational Consciousness vs. Civic Nationalism

The essay critiques the assumption that civic nationalism, rooted in constitutionalism, can replace long-standing markers of identity such as religion, culture, and language. These traditional markers have been instrumental in group formation and civilisational continuity across millennia.

Key Questions Raised:

• Can civic nationalism realistically supplant traditional civilisational markers, especially in a deeply rooted society like Bharat?
• If such a replacement occurs, would it not strip the society of its sense of self and collective memory, leaving it vulnerable to external influences?
• Are the proponents of secular civic nationalism intentionally promoting historical amnesia to weaken society’s survival instincts?

4. Historical Amnesia and Its Consequences

Using the example of present-day Bangladesh, the author argues that the loss of collective memory and a sense of history can have dire consequences for societal cohesion and survival. The essay cautions against undervaluing community and civilisational consciousness in favour of an immutable constitutional framework.

Key Insights:

• Historical amnesia and the erosion of civilisational consciousness can leave a society bereft of its survival instincts.
• The Constitution should not be positioned as immutable or above the needs and identity of a society, as it risks stifling the agency of future generations to redefine their destinies.

5. The Constitution and Bharat’s Pluralism

The essay challenges the assumption that the Indian Constitution alone preserves Bharat's pluralism and prevents it from descending into anarchy like its neighbours, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Instead, it argues that the dharmic ethos of Bharat's people has played a greater role in maintaining its pluralistic fabric.

Critique of Constitutional Supremacy:

• The presence of a constitution has not prevented coups or minority persecution in neighbouring countries.
• Bharat’s distinguishing factor is its dharmic barometer, which inherently values pluralism and respects constitutional institutions, not the Constitution per se.

6. Reconciling Civilisational Identity with Constitutional Goals

The essay concludes with a call to balance civilisational consciousness with the goals of constitutionalism. It stresses the importance of preserving a society’s sense of self while adapting constitutional frameworks to the needs of the present and the future.

Proposed Approach:

• Recognise the significance of civilisational markers in shaping societal identity and cohesion.
• Avoid treating the Constitution as immutable or sacrosanct, allowing room for evolution that aligns with civilisational values.
• Promote a nuanced understanding of constitutionalism that complements, rather than conflicts with, Bharat’s civilisational ethos.

Conclusion

This critique offers a powerful reflection on the ongoing struggle between civilisational identity and constitutional morality in Bharat. It calls for a reimagining of the relationship between the two, urging a move away from colonial legacies and towards a framework that harmonises civilisational consciousness with the principles of governance. By doing so, Bharat can preserve its rich pluralism and chart a path that respects its past while embracing its future.

 

                                          2^nd Perspective

It looks forward, rooted in civilization - Faizan Mustafa

This insightful critique addresses the evolving discourse on the Indian Constitution, its civilisational context, and its critics. The narrative oscillates between admiration for the Constitution's inclusivity and criticism of its perceived disconnect with India's civilisational heritage. Here's a detailed reflection on the key points raised:

1. The Constitution: A Living Stream

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s assertion that the Constitution is a "living, continuously flowing stream" aligns with the idea of its adaptability and its role in reflecting the aspirations of a vibrant nation. However, contrasting voices, particularly from within the Hindutva camp, highlight ideological contradictions.

Contradictory Narratives:

• While some see the Constitution as a colonial imposition severing India’s ties with its civilisation, others like the RSS chief argue that Hindutva reflects constitutional ideals.
• This duality either suggests a deliberate strategy to cater to diverse constituencies or genuine confusion about the Constitution’s value.

2. The Civilisational Context in the Constituent Assembly

Critics who claim that the Constitution undermines India’s civilisational identity overlook the Constituent Assembly’s repeated references to India’s ancient culture and traditions. The Objective Resolution, guided by Nehru, acknowledged India’s 5,000-year-old civilisational journey and its transition to modernity.

Key Insights:

• Leaders like Purushottam Das Tandon and Krishna Sinha rejected the binary of civilisation versus nation-state, emphasizing continuity.
• Syama Prasad Mookerjee, founder of the Jana Sangh, acknowledged that the Constitution derived its legitimacy from the Indian people, not colonial powers.

3. Indigenous Identity and Its Complexity

The assertion that the Constitution ignores Bharat’s indigeneity is overly simplistic. Indigenous identity in India is multifaceted, encompassing not just Aryan but also Adivasi traditions. The Adivasi perspective, represented by Jaspal Singh in the Constituent Assembly, challenged the notion of Aryan dominance and highlighted the democratic practices of indigenous communities predating modern constitutionalism.

4. Constitutional Morality and Dharmic Ethics

Critics often frame constitutional morality as antithetical to India’s traditions, citing judgments like Sabarimala (2017). However, a broader understanding of Indian civilisation suggests otherwise.

Counterpoints:

• Ashoka’s Dhamma: Often viewed as a form of constitutional morality, it promoted righteousness (dharma) over religious imposition, aligning with secular principles.
• Hindu Mahasabha’s Constitution: Its 1944 draft explicitly rejected a state religion, showcasing an early embrace of secularism, arguably more explicit than the Indian Constitution.

5. Borrowing and Innovation in the Indian Constitution

The framers of the Indian Constitution balanced borrowing from global traditions with adapting to India’s unique needs.

Examples:

• Parliamentary Democracy: Adapted from Britain, but with a republican framework.
• Fundamental Rights: Borrowed from the US, but with restrictions tailored to Indian realities.
• Separation of Functions: Instead of strict separation of powers, the Constitution embraced functional separation, resonating with the Lakshman Rekha ethos.

6. Historical Shortcomings and Social Realities

India’s past, though glorious, was marred by inequalities stemming from the caste system and gender disparities. Leaders like Hansa Mehta highlighted the unequal status of women in ancient India. The adoption of Western ideas like individualism was a conscious choice to address these inequalities.

7. Constitution as a Forward-Looking Document

The Constitution, by design, sets the agenda for the future. While rooted in India’s civilisational ethos, it consciously avoided fundamentalism and embraced values like diversity, tolerance, and acceptance.

Philosophical Standpoint:

• Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (the world is one family) justifies the adoption of ideas from global traditions.
• Learning from the past is valuable, but romanticizing or reviving it uncritically risks regressive outcomes.

8. The Way Forward

The article calls for a balanced perspective that:

• Recognizes the Constitution as a dynamic document reflecting both civilisational continuity and modern aspirations.
• Emphasizes inclusivity, diversity, and progress without losing sight of India’s historical identity.
• Challenges narrow critiques that view constitutionalism as a threat to civilisation.

Conclusion

The Indian Constitution stands as a testament to the interplay between civilisational heritage and modern governance. While it draws from global ideas, it remains deeply rooted in the ethos of pluralism and tolerance that define Indian civilisation. Critics must engage with the Constitution not as a relic of colonialism but as a living framework capable of evolving alongside the nation it represents.