Dara Shikoh (1615–1659) was the eldest son of the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan and his wife Mumtaz Mahal. His name is from Persian داراشكوه meaning “The possessor of Glory”. He was favoured as a successor by his father and his sister Jahanara Begum, but was defeated by his younger brother Aurangzeb in a bitter struggle for the Mughal throne.
Dara Shikoh was a gentle and pious Sufi intellectual, one of the greatest representatives of that uniquely Indian synthesis sometimes referred to as the “composite culture”. He was an erudite champion of mystical religious speculation (which made him a heretic in the eyes of his more orthodox brother and the coterie around him) and a poetic diviner of syncretic cultural interaction among people of all faiths. Historians have speculated how different India would have been had he prevailed over his less enlightened brother Aurangzeb. Dara was a follower of Lahore’s famous Qadiri Sufi saint Mian Mir, whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir’s spiritual disciple and successor). He devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam and Hinduism. Towards this goal he translated the Upanishads from its original Sanskrit into Persian so it could be read by Muslim scholars. His translation is often called “Sirre Akbar” or The Greatest Mystery, where he states boldly, in the Introduction, his speculative hypothesis that the work referred to in the Qur’an as the “Kitab al-maknun” or the hidden book is none other than the Upanishads. His most famous work, Majma ul-Bahrain (“The Mingling of the Two Oceans”) was also devoted to finding the commonalities between Sufism and Hindu Monotheism.
Dara's fate was decided by the political threat he posed as a prince popular with the common people – a convocation of nobles and clergy, called by Aurangzeb in response to the perceived danger of insurrection in Delhi, declared him a threat to the public peace and an apostate from Islam.[14] He was assassinated by four of Aurangzeb's henchmen in front of his terrified son on the night of 30 August 1659 (9 September Gregorian
Dara Shikoh is widely renowned[15] as an enlightened paragon of the harmonious coexistence of heterodox traditions on the Indian subcontinent. He was an erudite champion of mystical religious speculation and a poetic diviner of syncretic cultural interaction among people of all faiths. This made him a heretic in the eyes of his orthodox brother and a suspect eccentric in the view of many of the worldly power brokers swarming around the Mughal throne. Dara was a follower of the Persian "perennialist" mystic Sarmad Kashani,[16] as well as Lahore's famous Qadiri Sufi saint Hazrat Mian Mir,[17] whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir's spiritual disciple and successor) and who was so widely respected among all communities that he was invited to lay the foundation stone of the Golden Temple in Amritsar by the Sikhs.
Dara Shikoh (with Mian Mir and Mullah Shah Badakhshi), ca. 1635
Dara subsequently developed a friendship with the seventh Sikh Guru, Guru Har Rai. Dara devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam and Hinduism. Towards this goal he completed the translation of 50 Upanishads from its original Sanskrit into Persian in 1657 so it could be read by Muslim scholars.[18] His translation is often called Sirr-e-Akbar (The Greatest Mystery), where he states boldly, in the Introduction, his speculative hypothesis that the work referred to in the Qur'an as the "Kitab al-maknun" or the hidden book, is none other than the Upanishads.[19] His most famous work, Majma-ul-Bahrain ("The Confluence of the Two Seas"), was also devoted to a revelation of the mystical and pluralistic affinities between Sufic and Vedantic speculation.
The library established by Dara Shikoh still exists on the grounds of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi, and is now run as a museum by Archeological Survey of India after being renovated
MINGLING OF THE TWO OCEANS- HINDUISM AND ISLAM
Asghar Ali Engineer
Dara Shikoh has made seminal contribution to the composite culture of India. He was appointed heir apparent by Shah Jahan and had he become emperor of India it would have certainly made much difference to religio-cultural scene in India. Dara Shikoh had learnt Sanskrit and studied the Hindu scripture in original. He translated Upanishads into Persian directly from Sanskrit and called it Sirr-e-Akbar (The Great Mystery). And in introduction to this work he says that one finds in Upanishads the concept of tawhid (the doctrine of Unity of God, the most fundamental doctrine of Islam) after the Qur'an and perhaps the Qur'an refers to Upanishad when it refers to Kitab al-Maknun (The Hidden Book). His work Majma`ul Bahrayn (Mingling of the Two Oceans i.e. Hinduism and Islam) is very seminal work in the history of composite culture of India.
Dara Shikoh who was the disciple of the disciple of Mian Mir, the great Sufi saint who had laid the foundation stone of the Har Mandir in Amritsar at the instance of the Sikh Guru shows in this book that there is great deal of similarities between these two great religions Hinduism and Islam. He divides his tract into twenty sections like The Elements, The Senses, The Religious Exercises, The Attributes, the Great Resurrection and so on. In each section he discusses similarities between Hinduism and Islam.
For example, in the first section "Discourse on the Elements" he compares the concept of these elements in Islam and Hinduism. They are five in umber i.e. Arsh-i-Azam (The Great Throne); secondly the wind, thirdly the Fire; Fourthly the water and Fifthly the Dust. In the Indian language these are called Panch Bhut namely akas, vayu, tejas, jala and prithvi. He then discusses these elements and their similarities in both the traditions. Dara Shikoh for example compares Ruhi-i-Azam with Jivatma.
Then coming to Sifat-I-Allah Ta`ala i.e. Divine Attributes he says in Islamic Sufi tradition there are two Beauty (Jamal) and Majesty (Jamal) while in Indian tradition it is three called Triguna called Sattva, Rajas and tamas which mean Creation, Duration and Destruction. Then he goes on to compare Brahma, Vishnu and Mahishvara with Jibrail, Mika'il and Israfil. He says that Brahma or Jibra'il is the (Superintending angel) of Creation; Vishnu or Mika'il is the angel of Duration (or Existence) and Mahishwara or Israfil is the angel of Destruction. Dara Shikoh further says that water, wind and fire are also allied with these angels. Thus water goes with Jibra'il, fire with Mika'il and air with Israfil. Similarly Brahma is water, Vishnu is fire and Maheshwara is air.
In all these 20 sections in Majma`ul Bahrayn Dara Shikoh finds similarities between both Hindu and Islamic (particularly Sufi) traditions. The fanatics and fundamentalists in both the traditions denounce each other and try to prove the truth of their own religion. In such circumstances it is highly necessary to popularise writings of persons like Dara Shikoh who uphold the truth of all religious traditions. The Sufi Islam has been a bridge between Hindus and Muslims in India. The very fundamental doctrine of Sufism has been sulh-i-kula i.e. peace with all.
The Sufis go with essence, not with phraseology or terminology. The Sufis studied the local traditions and adopted many of them. Even in the Qur'an one finds remarkable similarities between some of the Hindu traditions and Islamic tradition. For example in Indian tradition we find Stayam, Shivam and Sundaram for God. One finds in the Qur'an Huwa'l Haq (He is Truth ), Jamil (Sundaram) and Jabbar (Shivam). All three Attributes are there in the Qur'an.
Also, the often quoted saying that Vasudhaiv Kutumbakum (entire universe is a family) finds its reflection in the Holy Prophet's saying Al-khalqu `Ayalullah i.e. entire creation is Allah's family. These are remarkable similarities between these two traditions. It is on these similarities that the Sufis and others built the bridges between the two communities. However, it is some political interests, which selectively and superficially use some traditions to divide Hindus and Muslims. Thus one can easily say that while religions unite the politics divide.
Among the `Ulama persons like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad came out with the doctrine of unity of religion (wahdat-i-din) which is also very constructive approach. There have been many Sufi saints in India like Mazhar Jan-i-Janan who accept Ram and Krishna as the Prophets of God as Allah has stated in the Qur'an that He has sent prophets to all nations. Thus we must promote similarities between Hindus and Muslims and there are abundant examples of these similarities in our scriptures.
Dara Shikuh: Majma‘ ul-Bahrain or the Mingling of the Two Oceans [of Islam and Hinduism]
Introduction: Dara Shikoh (1615-1659) was the eldest son the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan. He was educated as heir apparent but developed since his youth a strong interest in esoteric aspects of Islam and in mysticism which brought him since his twenties into direct contact with Hindu philosophy, Bhakti religion and ascetic movements. Deeply convinced of the reality of mystical experience, he realized that esoteric understanding of Islam and Hinduism displays a single divine principle behind the variety of outward manifestations. He authored several books, partly with the support of Muslim and Hindu scholars. In his Majma’ al-Bahrain, “the Mingling of the Two Oceans”, he proclaims in 1656 a monistic unity of Islam and Hinduism and other religions. In the following years he translated with the help of Brahmins 52 Upanishads into Persian in which he perceived the same transcendental unity of the absolute as known from the Koran. He was venerated by Hindus and Sufi orders alike, but declared a heretic by the sunni establishment and executed by his orthodox younger brother Aurangzeb in 1659.
(see also AHOI, ch. 5, section Auranzeb)
(quoted from Majma’-Ul-Bahrain or the Mingling of the Two Oceans by Prince Muhammad Dara Shikuh, translated by M. Mahfuz-ul-Haq, Calcutta 1929, pp. 50-53)
X. Discourse on the Vision of God (Rūyat).
The Indian monotheists call the Vision of God, Sāchātkār, that is, to see God with the (ordinary) eyes of the forehead. Know that the Vision of God, either by the Prophets, may peace be on them, or by the perfect divines, may their souls be sanctified, whether in this or the next world and whether with the outer or the inner eyes, cannot be doubted or disputed; and the “men of the Book” (ahl-i-kitāb),the perfect divines and the seers of all religions—whether they are believers in the Ḳur’ān, the Vedas, the Book of David or the Old and the New Testaments—have a (common) faith in this respect. Now, one who disbelieves the beholding of God is a thoughtless and sightless member of his community, the reason being: if the Holy Self is Omnipotent, how can He not have the potency to manifest Himself?This matter has been explained very clearly by the ‘Ulamā of the Sunnī Sect. But, if it is said, that (even) the Pure Self (dhjāt-i-baḥt)can be beheld, it is an impossibility; for the Pure Self is elegant and undetermined, and, as He cannot be determined, He is manifest in the veil of elegance only, and as such cannot be beheld, and such beholding is an impossibility. And the suggestion that He can be beheld in the next and not in this world, is groundless, for if He is Omnipotent, He is potent to manifest Himself in any manner, anywhere and at any time He likes. (I hold) that one who cannot behold Him here (i.e., in this world) will hardly behold Him there (i.e. in the next world); as He has said in the Holy verse: “And whoever is blind in this, he shall (also) be blind in the hereafter.”
The Mu’tazila3 and the Shī’a4 doctors, who are opposed to rūyat (Beholding), have committed a great blunder in this matter, for had they only denied the capability of beholding the Pure Self, there would have been some justification, but their denial of all forms of ruyat (i.e. Beholding) is a great mistake; the reason being that most of the Prophets and perfect divines have beheld God with their ordinary eyes and have heard His Holy words without any intermediary and, now, when they are, by all means, capable of hearing the words of God, why should they not be capable of beholding Him? Verily, they must be so; and, just as it is obligatory to have faith in God, the Angels, the (revealed) Books, the Prophets, the Destiny, the Good and the Evil, and the Holy Places, etc., so it is obligatory and incumbent to have faith in rūyat (Beholding). The unversed Sunnī `Ulamā who have disputed the meaning and wording of the tradition—in which. ‘Ā’isha Ṣiddīḳaasked Prophet (Muḥammad), Peace be on him,: “Didst thou behold thy Lord?” to which the Prophet replied, “It is light that I am beholding”—have read it as [??052] “It is Light, how can I behold it?” But this (tradition) cannot be an argument against beholding God, for if we put the former interpretation it will refer to His “complete beholding” (rūyat-i-tām) in the veil of Light but, if we interpret it as, “It is Light, how can I behold it?,” it will refer to His Pure and Colourless Self. So, it is not a difference in the context but rather a manifestation of the miracle of (our) Prophet who has explained two problems in one tradition. And the Holy verse : “(Some) faces on that day shall be bright, Looking to their Lord” is a clear argument in favour of rūyat, (Beholding), of our Lord, Exalted is His Dignity; (while) the verse : “Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends all vision; and He is the knower of subtilities, the Aware”7refers to his colourlessness, that is, the eye cannot behold Him in his Colourless and Absolute capacity, although He beholds all and possesses extreme elegance and colourlessness. And, the word huwa (He), found in the above Holy verse, refers to the invisibility of His Pure Self. Now, the beholding of God is of five kinds: first, in dream with the eyes of heart; secondly, beholding Him with the ordinary eyes ; thirdly, beholding Him in an intermediate state of sleep and wakefulness, which is a special kind of Selflessness; fourthly, (beholding Him) in (a stage of) special determination; fifthly,beholding the One Self in the multitudinous determinations of the internal and external worlds. In such a way beheld our Prophet, may peace be on him, whose `self’ had disappeared from the midst and the beholder and the beheld had merged in one and his sleep, wakefulness and selflessness looked as one and his internal and the external eyes had become one unified whole—such is the state of perfect rūyat (Beholding), which is not confined either to this or the next world and is possible everywhere and at every period.
Editor’s Note: At a time in its history when the Pakistani State is hostage to the Anti-India Jihadi enterprise of its security establishment, we the people of Pakistan can look to such universal heroes like the seventeenth century Mughal Prince, Dara Shikoh. Here was a man who possessed the humanity to see spirituality in everything and who celebrated coexistence, tolerance and diversity. His death at the hands of his twisted, bigoted and sectarian younger brother, Aurangzeb and the latter’s ascension to the throne marked a turning point, not just in the history of South Asia but as events later unfolded, in the world itself.
Aurangzeb’s harsh reign saw the State persecuting its Hindu and Shia muslim populations that culminated in the imposition of Jaziya and the destruction of the Shia kingdoms of Golconda and Bijapur in South India. In most ways, Aurangzeb’s reign was a departure from the relatively secular and syncretic reign of the earlier Mughals that culminated with that of the thoughtful and tolerant Dara.
“His most famous work, Majma-ul-Bahrain (“The Confluence of the Two Seas”), was also devoted to a revelation of the mystical and pluralistic affinities between Sufic and Vedantic speculation.” (Source: Wikipedia)
On the one hand, Dara the thoughtful intellectual translated the Vedic texts from Sanskrit to Persian. In this endeavour, he wanted to highlight that truth, humanity and spirituality are universal and are not bound by ideology. Aurangzeb’s view was dominated by a brutish view of the world which would only tolerate his stark views. Today, Aurangzeb is represented by the security establishment, the Judiciary, the media and right-wing Pro-Taliban Islamist politicians like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif , the various Jihadi groups and the Taliban.
Majma-ul-Bahrain
In the establishment-dominated narrative of the Pakistani State, his intellectual pursuits and tolerant worldview made Dara a deviant. His brutal execution by the cold-blooded Aurangzeb, along with that of his friend, Sachal Sarmast, ruptured the bonds that had developed between the muslims and hindus. Today, when shrines are being attacked by the security establishment-backed Jihadis, supporters of Pakistan’s People’s Party must remember the party culture is deeply influenced by the humane culture of the shrines. During the MRD movement, the shrines served as asylums for some PPP activists.
The Anti Zia protests by the Punjab Nujawan Mahaz) at Madu LaL shrine in Lahore highlight the fact that shrines are a powerful symbol of resistance against the security establishment in Pakistan. No wonder they are being attacked by the Jihadis. ISI stooges like Imran Khan will never take out a dharna against this attack on Pakistani culture. We are pleased to cross-post the following note that was posted by Safoora on her blog, “A Sufi Metamorphosis“
Dara Shikoh is what Pakistan should be!
DARA SHIKOH: THe Sufi prince
DARA Shikoh, the eldest son of Shah Jehan, has a very special place in the hearts of the people of Lahore. He was a sufi mrtyre and an gnostic and unitarian.
Above all, he was a man of immense learning and scholarship, and his inclination towards Sufism and negation of rigid fundamentalism endears him to all likeminded people.He created a synthesis of all the religous traditions and focused on the common motifs among all of them.DARA devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam andHinduism,his fundamental concern was the quest for the discovery of the Unity of God (tauhid), seeking to draw out the commonalities in the scriptures of the Hindus and the Muslims.
His most famous work, Majma ul-Bahrain (“The Mingling of the Two Oceans”) was also devoted to finding the commonalities between Sufism and Hindu Monotheism
Thus, Dara says, referring to the Divine:
You dwell in the Ka’aba and in Somnath [a famous Shaivite Hindu temple]
And in the hearts of the enamoured lovers.
This work in the eye of orthodoxy rendered him an apostate and He was killed by his brother Aurangzeb.Today…we are again fighting Dara’s fight and protecting the true spirit of Islam from literalists….who give religious praphrenelia and appearances more importance than true faith within.So its important to revisit the tale of SUFI Prince Darashikoh who died, crying out to God.
DARA’s initiation into Sufism:
At the age of 19, Dara Shikoh recovered from a serious illness after visiting Hazrat Mian Mir, the Sufi sage of Lahore. His faith in the power of saints and his interest in religion were firmly established. In 1640 he became a disciple of Mullah Shah, one of Mian Mir’s successors. It was in Lahore where he wrote a book containing biographies of Sufi saints. A biography of Mian Mir and his principal disciples followed two years later. He also wrote brief Sufi pamphlets, one of which was a reply to those who criticised him for his statements.Dara Shikoh was a follower of Lahore’s famous Qadiri Sufi Saint Mian Mir, whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir’s spiritual disciple and successor).
UNITY OF GOD: SYNTHESIS OF SUFISM & VEDANTA:
Dara was a unitarian…he believed in the truth of all the religious traditions.
In pursuit of this aim, Dara now set about seeking to learn more about the religious systems of the Hindus. He studied Sanskrit, and, with the help of the Pandits of Benaras, made a Persian translation of the Upanishads, which was later followed by his Persian renderings of the Gita and the Yoga Vasishta.
The most well-known of Dara’s several works on the religious sciences of the Hindus is his Majma ul-Bahrain (‘The Mingling of the Two Oceans’). Completed when Dara was forty two years old, this book is a pioneering attempt to build on the similarities between Sufism and certain strands of Hindu monotheistic thought, and it is these two that the ‘two oceans’ in the book’s name refer to.
This book, written in Lahore, was published 150 years later in French in two volumes in 1801 and 1802, and it greatly influenced European thinkers like Schopenhauer, as well as many others He describes this treatise as ‘a collection of the truth and wisdom of two Truth-knowing groups’. It is, in terms of content, rather technical, focussing on Hindu terminology and their equivalents in Islamic Sufism. The basic message that this book conveys is summed up in Dara’s own words thus: ‘Mysticism is equality‘, and, he adds, ‘If I know that an infidel, immersed in sin, is, in a way, singing the note of monotheism, I go to him, hear him and am grateful to him’.
The Majma-ul Bahrain is divided into twenty-two sections, in each of which Dara seeks to draw out the similarities between Hindu and Sufi concepts and teachings.
The translator then quotes Dara as saying:
My chief reason for this noble command [to have the Yoga Vasishta translated] is that although I had profited by pursuing a translation of the Yoga Vasishta ascribed to Shaikh Sufi, yet once two saintly persons appeared in my dreams; one of whom was tall, whose hair was gray, the other short and without any hair. The former was Vasishta and the latter Ram Chandra, and as I had read the translation already alluded to, I was naturally attracted to them and paid them my respects. Vasisht was very kind to me and patted me on the back, and, addressing Ram Chandra, told him that I was brother to him because both he and I were seekers after truth. He asked Ram Chandra to embrace me, which he did in exuberance of love. Thereupon, Vasishta gave some sweets to Ram Chandra, which I also took and ate. After this vision, a desire to cause the translation of the book intensified in me.
Thus, for instance, the Hindu notion of Mutki, he says, is identical with the Sufi concept of Salvation, denoting the annihilation (fana) of the self in God. Or, for example, the Sufi concept of ‘ishq (Love) is said to be identical with the maya of the Hindu monotheists. From Love, says Dara, was born the ‘great soul’, alternately known as the soul of Muhammad to the Sufis, and Mahatman or Hiranyagarba to the Hindus.
Dara’s translation of certain Hindu scriptures into Persian represents a landmark in the process of developing bridges of understanding between people of different faiths in medieval India, in which the Sufis played the leading role. One of Dara’s earliest attempts at translation was his rendering of the Gita into Persian. Keenly interested as he was in the philosophy of Yoga, slator of the text opens his treatise with praises of God and the Prophet Muhammad thus:
In Majma-ul-Bahrain, completed in 1655, Dara Shikoh traced parallells between Islamic Sufism and Hindu Vedantism. “There were not many differences, except verbal, in the ways we… comprehended the truth.”
His search for traces of monotheism in the religious systems of the Hindus stems, he says, from his faith in the Qur’an, which states that God has, from time to time, sent prophets to all peoples to preach the worship of the One.
Thus, he goes on to add:
And it can also be ascertained from the Holy Qur’an that there is no nation without a prophet and without a revealed scripture, for it has been said: ‘Nor do We chastise until We raise an apostle’ [Qur'an: XVII, 15]. And in another verse: ‘And there is not a people but a warner has gone among them’ [Qur'an: XXXV, 24]. And at another place: ‘Certainly we sent our apostles with clear arguments, and sent down with them the Book and the Measure’ [Qur'an: LVII, 25].
Dara expresses this concern in his Persian translation of the Upanishads, the Sirr ul-Akbar (‘The Great Secret’) thus:
And whereas I was impressed with a longing to behold the Gnostic doctrines of every sect and to hear their lofty expressions of monotheism and had cast my eyes upon many theological books and had been a follower thereof for many years, my passion for beholding the Unity [of God], which is a boundless ocean, increased every moment. [.] Thereafter, I began to ponder as to why the discussion of monotheism is so conspicuous in India and why the Indian [Hindu] mystics and theologians of ancient India do not disavow the Unity of God, nor do they find any fault with the Unitarians.
It was his these works which were later used be religous orthodoxy in his trial to declare him an apostate and legalize his political murder
DARA’s fight agaisnt religious orthodoxy;
Dara’s next book on Islamic Sufism is the Hasanat ul-’Arifin or ‘The Aphorisms of the Gnostics’. It consists of the sayings of 107 Sufis of various spiritual orders. Explaining the objective behind writing the book, Dara says in his introduction:
I was enamoured of studying books on the ways of the men of the Path and had in my mind nothing save the understanding of the Unity of God; and before this, in a state of ecstasy and enthusiasm, I had uttered some words pertaining to sublime knowledge, because of which certain bigoted and narrow-minded people accused me of heresy and apostasy. It was then that I realised the importance of compiling the aphorisms of great believers in the Unity of God and the sayings of saints who have, hitherto, acquired knowledge of Reality, so that these may serve as an argument against those who are really imposters.
In the Hasanat ul-’Arifin, Dara bitterly criticises those self-styled ‘ulama who, ignoring the inner dimension of the faith, focus simply on external rituals. His critique is directed against mindless ritualism emptied of inner spiritual content, and he challenges the claims of the ‘ulama who would readily trade their faith for worldly gain. Thus, he says:
May the world be free from the noise of the Mulla
And none should pay any heed to their fatwas.
As for those ‘ulama who claim to be religious authorities but have actually little or no understanding at all of the true spirit of religion, Dara writes that, ‘As a matter of fact, these are ignoramuses to themselves and learned to the ignorant’, and adds the following couplet:
Every prophet and saint suffered afflictions and torments,
Due to the vicious and ignominious conduct of the mulla.
Orthodoxy extracted its revenge on the inclusive spirit of DARA and used his sufi teachings and books as a proof of heresy and gace his brother Aurangzeb the justification to murder him
Dara on Sufism;
Dara was a Sufi of the Qadiri tareeqa an wrote extensively about Sufism. The Safinat ul-Auliya, a biography of several leading Sufi saints, was Dara’s first work, composed in 1640 C.E., when he was just 25 years of age. Here he stresses the importance of the Sufi pirs or guides, because, he believes, one can attain knowledge of the mystical path only through the assistance of a spiritual master. In Dara’s words, ‘God never leaves his people without saints to guide them. [.] Therefore, next to the prophets, there are no other persons than the saints nearer in the presence of God, the Almighty’. The true saint is a ‘perfect guide’ (pir-i kamil), for, ‘No one is more compassionate and magnanimous, erudite and practical, humble and polite, heroic and charitable than the members of this hierarchy of the saints’.
The Safinat ul-Auliya is Dara’s second biography of various Sufi saints. Unlike the Sakinat ul-Auliya, which deals with Sufis of various orders, this book discusses only the Qadri Sufis of India. Dara himself was a Qadri, and as he puts it, ‘Nothing attracts me more than this Qadri order, which has fulfilled my spiritual aspirations’. The Qadri order, one of the most popular and widespread of all the Sufi silsilahs, traces its origins to the Prophet through the twelfth century Sufi and Islamic scholar of great renown, Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jilani of Baghdad. The Sakinat ul-Auliya was completed in 1642 C.E., when Dara was 28 years old, three years after his first meeting with the Qadri Sufi Miyan Mir. In the same year, Dara came into contact with another leading Qadri saint, Mulla Shah Badakshani (d. 1642 C.E.), who, like Miyan Mir, exercised a particularly powerful influence on Dara, which is readily apparent in his description of the practices of the Qadris in the Sakinat ul-Auliya.
Two short, yet important, works of Dara on the various stages and practices associated with the Sufi path are the Tariqat ul-Haqiqat and the Risala-i Haq Numa.
The text goes on to discuss the thirty stages (manazil) on the Sufi path, the first of which is detachment from the materialistic world and the last of which is realisation of the Truth. Broadly the same theme is discussed in the Risala-i Haq Numa, where the seeker (salik) is shown as starting from the Alam-i Nasut or ‘The Physical Plane’, and, passing through various stages, finally reaching the Alam-i Lahut or ‘the Plane of Absolute Truth’. Some of the physical exercises employed by the Sufis that are described in the Risala-i Haq Numa are shown by Dara to be similar to those used by the Hindu Tantriks and Yogis. These include astral healing and concentration on the centres of meditation in the heart and brain. Further, he suggests that the four planes through which the Sufi seeker’s journey takes him-Nasut , Jabrut, Malakut and Lahut-correspond to the Hindu concept of the Avasthanam or the four ‘states’ of Jagrat, Swapna, Shushpati and Turiya.
Dara established close and cordial relations with mystics from various backgrounds. Among these were several jogis and sadhus, about some of whom Dara also wrote. One such sadhu was Baba Lal, follower of the renowned Sufi-Bhakti saint Kabir and founder of a small monotheistic order named after him as the Baba Lalis. Many of the teachings of this sect can be traced to a distinct Sufi influence. A summary of these teachings is to be found in Dara’s Makalama Baba Lal wa Dara Shikoh, which consists of seven long conversations between the Baba and Dara held in Lahore in 1653 C.E.. These seven discourses were composed originally in Hindawi, and were later translated into Persian by Dara’s chief secretary, Rai Chandar Bhan. As in the case of Dara’s translation of the Yoga Vasishta, this text focuses particularly on certain similarities in the teachings of Hindu and Muslim mystics.
DARA as a poet:
One of the most intriguing works of Dara’s is his collection of poems, the Diwan, also known as the Iksir-i ‘Azam. Some of the verses from the Diwan, given below, suggest the train of Dara’s mystical thought:
On Monotheism [tauhid]
Look where you can, All is He,
God’s face is ever face to face.
Whatever you behold except Him is the object of your fancy,
Things other than He have an existence like a mirage.
The existence of God is like a boundless ocean,
People are like forms and waves in its water.
Though I do not consider myself separate from Him,
Yet I do not consider myself God.
Whatever relation the drop bears with the ocean,
That I hold true in my belief, and nothing beyond.
We have not seen an atom separate from the Sun,
Every drop of water is the sea in itself.
With what name should one call the Truth?
Every name that exists is one of God’s names.
On Divine Love ;
O Thou, from whose very name rains Love abundant!
And from your message rains Love!
Whoever passes through Your street realises
That indeed from the very door to the terrace of Your house rains l love!
On the Mystical Path
Turn to none except God,
The rosary and the sacred thread are but only a means to an end.
All this piety is conceit and hypocrisy,
How can it be worthy of our Beloved?.
Kingship is easy, acquaint yourself with poverty,
Why should a drop become a pearl when it can transform itself into an ocean?.
Hands soiled with gold begin to stink,
How awful is the plight of the soul soiled with gold!
Day and night you hear of people dying,
You, too, have to die. How strange is your behaviour!.
The more a traveller is unencumbered,
The less he feels worried on his journey.
You, too, are a traveller in this world,
Take this as certain, if you are wakeful.
Drive egoism away from you,
For, like conceit and arrogance, it is also a burden.
So long as you live in this world, be independent,
The Qadri has warned you!
Whoever recognised this, carried the day,
He who lost himself, found Him.
And he who sought Him not within his own self,
Passed away, carrying his quest along with him.
The Qadri found his Beloved within his own self,
Being himself of good disposition, he won the favour of the Good.
To whatever object you may turn your face, He is in view,
Are you blind, for why do you assign Him to yourself?
Dara On The Religious Systems of the Hindus
Among the most noteworthy distinguished Sufi poet that Dara Shikoh was attracted to was Sarmad, a truly remarkable man who was beheaded by Aurangzeb. Indeed, Dara Shikoh seems to have been in the middle of the entire literary, spiritual, and intellectual movement that was to propel Lahore as a centre of a liberal tradition not known in the subcontinent before. His spirit still pervades the way we think, a sort of detached tolerance to every point of view. The execution of Dara by his brother Aurangzeb led to this tradition being badly dented.
- See more at: http://lubpak.com/archives/49466#sthash.FzpfN67w.dpuf
Dara Shikoh was a gentle and pious Sufi intellectual, one of the greatest representatives of that uniquely Indian synthesis sometimes referred to as the “composite culture”. He was an erudite champion of mystical religious speculation (which made him a heretic in the eyes of his more orthodox brother and the coterie around him) and a poetic diviner of syncretic cultural interaction among people of all faiths. Historians have speculated how different India would have been had he prevailed over his less enlightened brother Aurangzeb. Dara was a follower of Lahore’s famous Qadiri Sufi saint Mian Mir, whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir’s spiritual disciple and successor). He devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam and Hinduism. Towards this goal he translated the Upanishads from its original Sanskrit into Persian so it could be read by Muslim scholars. His translation is often called “Sirre Akbar” or The Greatest Mystery, where he states boldly, in the Introduction, his speculative hypothesis that the work referred to in the Qur’an as the “Kitab al-maknun” or the hidden book is none other than the Upanishads. His most famous work, Majma ul-Bahrain (“The Mingling of the Two Oceans”) was also devoted to finding the commonalities between Sufism and Hindu Monotheism.
Dara's fate was decided by the political threat he posed as a prince popular with the common people – a convocation of nobles and clergy, called by Aurangzeb in response to the perceived danger of insurrection in Delhi, declared him a threat to the public peace and an apostate from Islam.[14] He was assassinated by four of Aurangzeb's henchmen in front of his terrified son on the night of 30 August 1659 (9 September Gregorian
Dara Shikoh is widely renowned[15] as an enlightened paragon of the harmonious coexistence of heterodox traditions on the Indian subcontinent. He was an erudite champion of mystical religious speculation and a poetic diviner of syncretic cultural interaction among people of all faiths. This made him a heretic in the eyes of his orthodox brother and a suspect eccentric in the view of many of the worldly power brokers swarming around the Mughal throne. Dara was a follower of the Persian "perennialist" mystic Sarmad Kashani,[16] as well as Lahore's famous Qadiri Sufi saint Hazrat Mian Mir,[17] whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir's spiritual disciple and successor) and who was so widely respected among all communities that he was invited to lay the foundation stone of the Golden Temple in Amritsar by the Sikhs.
Dara Shikoh (with Mian Mir and Mullah Shah Badakhshi), ca. 1635
Dara subsequently developed a friendship with the seventh Sikh Guru, Guru Har Rai. Dara devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam and Hinduism. Towards this goal he completed the translation of 50 Upanishads from its original Sanskrit into Persian in 1657 so it could be read by Muslim scholars.[18] His translation is often called Sirr-e-Akbar (The Greatest Mystery), where he states boldly, in the Introduction, his speculative hypothesis that the work referred to in the Qur'an as the "Kitab al-maknun" or the hidden book, is none other than the Upanishads.[19] His most famous work, Majma-ul-Bahrain ("The Confluence of the Two Seas"), was also devoted to a revelation of the mystical and pluralistic affinities between Sufic and Vedantic speculation.
The library established by Dara Shikoh still exists on the grounds of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi, and is now run as a museum by Archeological Survey of India after being renovated
MINGLING OF THE TWO OCEANS- HINDUISM AND ISLAM
Asghar Ali Engineer
Dara Shikoh has made seminal contribution to the composite culture of India. He was appointed heir apparent by Shah Jahan and had he become emperor of India it would have certainly made much difference to religio-cultural scene in India. Dara Shikoh had learnt Sanskrit and studied the Hindu scripture in original. He translated Upanishads into Persian directly from Sanskrit and called it Sirr-e-Akbar (The Great Mystery). And in introduction to this work he says that one finds in Upanishads the concept of tawhid (the doctrine of Unity of God, the most fundamental doctrine of Islam) after the Qur'an and perhaps the Qur'an refers to Upanishad when it refers to Kitab al-Maknun (The Hidden Book). His work Majma`ul Bahrayn (Mingling of the Two Oceans i.e. Hinduism and Islam) is very seminal work in the history of composite culture of India.
Dara Shikoh who was the disciple of the disciple of Mian Mir, the great Sufi saint who had laid the foundation stone of the Har Mandir in Amritsar at the instance of the Sikh Guru shows in this book that there is great deal of similarities between these two great religions Hinduism and Islam. He divides his tract into twenty sections like The Elements, The Senses, The Religious Exercises, The Attributes, the Great Resurrection and so on. In each section he discusses similarities between Hinduism and Islam.
For example, in the first section "Discourse on the Elements" he compares the concept of these elements in Islam and Hinduism. They are five in umber i.e. Arsh-i-Azam (The Great Throne); secondly the wind, thirdly the Fire; Fourthly the water and Fifthly the Dust. In the Indian language these are called Panch Bhut namely akas, vayu, tejas, jala and prithvi. He then discusses these elements and their similarities in both the traditions. Dara Shikoh for example compares Ruhi-i-Azam with Jivatma.
Then coming to Sifat-I-Allah Ta`ala i.e. Divine Attributes he says in Islamic Sufi tradition there are two Beauty (Jamal) and Majesty (Jamal) while in Indian tradition it is three called Triguna called Sattva, Rajas and tamas which mean Creation, Duration and Destruction. Then he goes on to compare Brahma, Vishnu and Mahishvara with Jibrail, Mika'il and Israfil. He says that Brahma or Jibra'il is the (Superintending angel) of Creation; Vishnu or Mika'il is the angel of Duration (or Existence) and Mahishwara or Israfil is the angel of Destruction. Dara Shikoh further says that water, wind and fire are also allied with these angels. Thus water goes with Jibra'il, fire with Mika'il and air with Israfil. Similarly Brahma is water, Vishnu is fire and Maheshwara is air.
In all these 20 sections in Majma`ul Bahrayn Dara Shikoh finds similarities between both Hindu and Islamic (particularly Sufi) traditions. The fanatics and fundamentalists in both the traditions denounce each other and try to prove the truth of their own religion. In such circumstances it is highly necessary to popularise writings of persons like Dara Shikoh who uphold the truth of all religious traditions. The Sufi Islam has been a bridge between Hindus and Muslims in India. The very fundamental doctrine of Sufism has been sulh-i-kula i.e. peace with all.
The Sufis go with essence, not with phraseology or terminology. The Sufis studied the local traditions and adopted many of them. Even in the Qur'an one finds remarkable similarities between some of the Hindu traditions and Islamic tradition. For example in Indian tradition we find Stayam, Shivam and Sundaram for God. One finds in the Qur'an Huwa'l Haq (He is Truth ), Jamil (Sundaram) and Jabbar (Shivam). All three Attributes are there in the Qur'an.
Also, the often quoted saying that Vasudhaiv Kutumbakum (entire universe is a family) finds its reflection in the Holy Prophet's saying Al-khalqu `Ayalullah i.e. entire creation is Allah's family. These are remarkable similarities between these two traditions. It is on these similarities that the Sufis and others built the bridges between the two communities. However, it is some political interests, which selectively and superficially use some traditions to divide Hindus and Muslims. Thus one can easily say that while religions unite the politics divide.
Among the `Ulama persons like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad came out with the doctrine of unity of religion (wahdat-i-din) which is also very constructive approach. There have been many Sufi saints in India like Mazhar Jan-i-Janan who accept Ram and Krishna as the Prophets of God as Allah has stated in the Qur'an that He has sent prophets to all nations. Thus we must promote similarities between Hindus and Muslims and there are abundant examples of these similarities in our scriptures.
Dara Shikuh: Majma‘ ul-Bahrain or the Mingling of the Two Oceans [of Islam and Hinduism]
Introduction: Dara Shikoh (1615-1659) was the eldest son the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan. He was educated as heir apparent but developed since his youth a strong interest in esoteric aspects of Islam and in mysticism which brought him since his twenties into direct contact with Hindu philosophy, Bhakti religion and ascetic movements. Deeply convinced of the reality of mystical experience, he realized that esoteric understanding of Islam and Hinduism displays a single divine principle behind the variety of outward manifestations. He authored several books, partly with the support of Muslim and Hindu scholars. In his Majma’ al-Bahrain, “the Mingling of the Two Oceans”, he proclaims in 1656 a monistic unity of Islam and Hinduism and other religions. In the following years he translated with the help of Brahmins 52 Upanishads into Persian in which he perceived the same transcendental unity of the absolute as known from the Koran. He was venerated by Hindus and Sufi orders alike, but declared a heretic by the sunni establishment and executed by his orthodox younger brother Aurangzeb in 1659.
(see also AHOI, ch. 5, section Auranzeb)
(quoted from Majma’-Ul-Bahrain or the Mingling of the Two Oceans by Prince Muhammad Dara Shikuh, translated by M. Mahfuz-ul-Haq, Calcutta 1929, pp. 50-53)
X. Discourse on the Vision of God (Rūyat).
The Indian monotheists call the Vision of God, Sāchātkār, that is, to see God with the (ordinary) eyes of the forehead. Know that the Vision of God, either by the Prophets, may peace be on them, or by the perfect divines, may their souls be sanctified, whether in this or the next world and whether with the outer or the inner eyes, cannot be doubted or disputed; and the “men of the Book” (ahl-i-kitāb),the perfect divines and the seers of all religions—whether they are believers in the Ḳur’ān, the Vedas, the Book of David or the Old and the New Testaments—have a (common) faith in this respect. Now, one who disbelieves the beholding of God is a thoughtless and sightless member of his community, the reason being: if the Holy Self is Omnipotent, how can He not have the potency to manifest Himself?This matter has been explained very clearly by the ‘Ulamā of the Sunnī Sect. But, if it is said, that (even) the Pure Self (dhjāt-i-baḥt)can be beheld, it is an impossibility; for the Pure Self is elegant and undetermined, and, as He cannot be determined, He is manifest in the veil of elegance only, and as such cannot be beheld, and such beholding is an impossibility. And the suggestion that He can be beheld in the next and not in this world, is groundless, for if He is Omnipotent, He is potent to manifest Himself in any manner, anywhere and at any time He likes. (I hold) that one who cannot behold Him here (i.e., in this world) will hardly behold Him there (i.e. in the next world); as He has said in the Holy verse: “And whoever is blind in this, he shall (also) be blind in the hereafter.”
The Mu’tazila3 and the Shī’a4 doctors, who are opposed to rūyat (Beholding), have committed a great blunder in this matter, for had they only denied the capability of beholding the Pure Self, there would have been some justification, but their denial of all forms of ruyat (i.e. Beholding) is a great mistake; the reason being that most of the Prophets and perfect divines have beheld God with their ordinary eyes and have heard His Holy words without any intermediary and, now, when they are, by all means, capable of hearing the words of God, why should they not be capable of beholding Him? Verily, they must be so; and, just as it is obligatory to have faith in God, the Angels, the (revealed) Books, the Prophets, the Destiny, the Good and the Evil, and the Holy Places, etc., so it is obligatory and incumbent to have faith in rūyat (Beholding). The unversed Sunnī `Ulamā who have disputed the meaning and wording of the tradition—in which. ‘Ā’isha Ṣiddīḳaasked Prophet (Muḥammad), Peace be on him,: “Didst thou behold thy Lord?” to which the Prophet replied, “It is light that I am beholding”—have read it as [??052] “It is Light, how can I behold it?” But this (tradition) cannot be an argument against beholding God, for if we put the former interpretation it will refer to His “complete beholding” (rūyat-i-tām) in the veil of Light but, if we interpret it as, “It is Light, how can I behold it?,” it will refer to His Pure and Colourless Self. So, it is not a difference in the context but rather a manifestation of the miracle of (our) Prophet who has explained two problems in one tradition. And the Holy verse : “(Some) faces on that day shall be bright, Looking to their Lord” is a clear argument in favour of rūyat, (Beholding), of our Lord, Exalted is His Dignity; (while) the verse : “Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends all vision; and He is the knower of subtilities, the Aware”7refers to his colourlessness, that is, the eye cannot behold Him in his Colourless and Absolute capacity, although He beholds all and possesses extreme elegance and colourlessness. And, the word huwa (He), found in the above Holy verse, refers to the invisibility of His Pure Self. Now, the beholding of God is of five kinds: first, in dream with the eyes of heart; secondly, beholding Him with the ordinary eyes ; thirdly, beholding Him in an intermediate state of sleep and wakefulness, which is a special kind of Selflessness; fourthly, (beholding Him) in (a stage of) special determination; fifthly,beholding the One Self in the multitudinous determinations of the internal and external worlds. In such a way beheld our Prophet, may peace be on him, whose `self’ had disappeared from the midst and the beholder and the beheld had merged in one and his sleep, wakefulness and selflessness looked as one and his internal and the external eyes had become one unified whole—such is the state of perfect rūyat (Beholding), which is not confined either to this or the next world and is possible everywhere and at every period.
Editor’s Note: At a time in its history when the Pakistani State is hostage to the Anti-India Jihadi enterprise of its security establishment, we the people of Pakistan can look to such universal heroes like the seventeenth century Mughal Prince, Dara Shikoh. Here was a man who possessed the humanity to see spirituality in everything and who celebrated coexistence, tolerance and diversity. His death at the hands of his twisted, bigoted and sectarian younger brother, Aurangzeb and the latter’s ascension to the throne marked a turning point, not just in the history of South Asia but as events later unfolded, in the world itself.
Aurangzeb’s harsh reign saw the State persecuting its Hindu and Shia muslim populations that culminated in the imposition of Jaziya and the destruction of the Shia kingdoms of Golconda and Bijapur in South India. In most ways, Aurangzeb’s reign was a departure from the relatively secular and syncretic reign of the earlier Mughals that culminated with that of the thoughtful and tolerant Dara.
“His most famous work, Majma-ul-Bahrain (“The Confluence of the Two Seas”), was also devoted to a revelation of the mystical and pluralistic affinities between Sufic and Vedantic speculation.” (Source: Wikipedia)
On the one hand, Dara the thoughtful intellectual translated the Vedic texts from Sanskrit to Persian. In this endeavour, he wanted to highlight that truth, humanity and spirituality are universal and are not bound by ideology. Aurangzeb’s view was dominated by a brutish view of the world which would only tolerate his stark views. Today, Aurangzeb is represented by the security establishment, the Judiciary, the media and right-wing Pro-Taliban Islamist politicians like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif , the various Jihadi groups and the Taliban.
Majma-ul-Bahrain
In the establishment-dominated narrative of the Pakistani State, his intellectual pursuits and tolerant worldview made Dara a deviant. His brutal execution by the cold-blooded Aurangzeb, along with that of his friend, Sachal Sarmast, ruptured the bonds that had developed between the muslims and hindus. Today, when shrines are being attacked by the security establishment-backed Jihadis, supporters of Pakistan’s People’s Party must remember the party culture is deeply influenced by the humane culture of the shrines. During the MRD movement, the shrines served as asylums for some PPP activists.
The Anti Zia protests by the Punjab Nujawan Mahaz) at Madu LaL shrine in Lahore highlight the fact that shrines are a powerful symbol of resistance against the security establishment in Pakistan. No wonder they are being attacked by the Jihadis. ISI stooges like Imran Khan will never take out a dharna against this attack on Pakistani culture. We are pleased to cross-post the following note that was posted by Safoora on her blog, “A Sufi Metamorphosis“
Dara Shikoh is what Pakistan should be!
DARA SHIKOH: THe Sufi prince
DARA Shikoh, the eldest son of Shah Jehan, has a very special place in the hearts of the people of Lahore. He was a sufi mrtyre and an gnostic and unitarian.
Above all, he was a man of immense learning and scholarship, and his inclination towards Sufism and negation of rigid fundamentalism endears him to all likeminded people.He created a synthesis of all the religous traditions and focused on the common motifs among all of them.DARA devoted much effort towards finding a common mystical language between Islam andHinduism,his fundamental concern was the quest for the discovery of the Unity of God (tauhid), seeking to draw out the commonalities in the scriptures of the Hindus and the Muslims.
His most famous work, Majma ul-Bahrain (“The Mingling of the Two Oceans”) was also devoted to finding the commonalities between Sufism and Hindu Monotheism
Thus, Dara says, referring to the Divine:
You dwell in the Ka’aba and in Somnath [a famous Shaivite Hindu temple]
And in the hearts of the enamoured lovers.
This work in the eye of orthodoxy rendered him an apostate and He was killed by his brother Aurangzeb.Today…we are again fighting Dara’s fight and protecting the true spirit of Islam from literalists….who give religious praphrenelia and appearances more importance than true faith within.So its important to revisit the tale of SUFI Prince Darashikoh who died, crying out to God.
DARA’s initiation into Sufism:
At the age of 19, Dara Shikoh recovered from a serious illness after visiting Hazrat Mian Mir, the Sufi sage of Lahore. His faith in the power of saints and his interest in religion were firmly established. In 1640 he became a disciple of Mullah Shah, one of Mian Mir’s successors. It was in Lahore where he wrote a book containing biographies of Sufi saints. A biography of Mian Mir and his principal disciples followed two years later. He also wrote brief Sufi pamphlets, one of which was a reply to those who criticised him for his statements.Dara Shikoh was a follower of Lahore’s famous Qadiri Sufi Saint Mian Mir, whom he was introduced to by Mullah Shah Badakhshi (Mian Mir’s spiritual disciple and successor).
UNITY OF GOD: SYNTHESIS OF SUFISM & VEDANTA:
Dara was a unitarian…he believed in the truth of all the religious traditions.
In pursuit of this aim, Dara now set about seeking to learn more about the religious systems of the Hindus. He studied Sanskrit, and, with the help of the Pandits of Benaras, made a Persian translation of the Upanishads, which was later followed by his Persian renderings of the Gita and the Yoga Vasishta.
The most well-known of Dara’s several works on the religious sciences of the Hindus is his Majma ul-Bahrain (‘The Mingling of the Two Oceans’). Completed when Dara was forty two years old, this book is a pioneering attempt to build on the similarities between Sufism and certain strands of Hindu monotheistic thought, and it is these two that the ‘two oceans’ in the book’s name refer to.
This book, written in Lahore, was published 150 years later in French in two volumes in 1801 and 1802, and it greatly influenced European thinkers like Schopenhauer, as well as many others He describes this treatise as ‘a collection of the truth and wisdom of two Truth-knowing groups’. It is, in terms of content, rather technical, focussing on Hindu terminology and their equivalents in Islamic Sufism. The basic message that this book conveys is summed up in Dara’s own words thus: ‘Mysticism is equality‘, and, he adds, ‘If I know that an infidel, immersed in sin, is, in a way, singing the note of monotheism, I go to him, hear him and am grateful to him’.
The Majma-ul Bahrain is divided into twenty-two sections, in each of which Dara seeks to draw out the similarities between Hindu and Sufi concepts and teachings.
The translator then quotes Dara as saying:
My chief reason for this noble command [to have the Yoga Vasishta translated] is that although I had profited by pursuing a translation of the Yoga Vasishta ascribed to Shaikh Sufi, yet once two saintly persons appeared in my dreams; one of whom was tall, whose hair was gray, the other short and without any hair. The former was Vasishta and the latter Ram Chandra, and as I had read the translation already alluded to, I was naturally attracted to them and paid them my respects. Vasisht was very kind to me and patted me on the back, and, addressing Ram Chandra, told him that I was brother to him because both he and I were seekers after truth. He asked Ram Chandra to embrace me, which he did in exuberance of love. Thereupon, Vasishta gave some sweets to Ram Chandra, which I also took and ate. After this vision, a desire to cause the translation of the book intensified in me.
Thus, for instance, the Hindu notion of Mutki, he says, is identical with the Sufi concept of Salvation, denoting the annihilation (fana) of the self in God. Or, for example, the Sufi concept of ‘ishq (Love) is said to be identical with the maya of the Hindu monotheists. From Love, says Dara, was born the ‘great soul’, alternately known as the soul of Muhammad to the Sufis, and Mahatman or Hiranyagarba to the Hindus.
Dara’s translation of certain Hindu scriptures into Persian represents a landmark in the process of developing bridges of understanding between people of different faiths in medieval India, in which the Sufis played the leading role. One of Dara’s earliest attempts at translation was his rendering of the Gita into Persian. Keenly interested as he was in the philosophy of Yoga, slator of the text opens his treatise with praises of God and the Prophet Muhammad thus:
In Majma-ul-Bahrain, completed in 1655, Dara Shikoh traced parallells between Islamic Sufism and Hindu Vedantism. “There were not many differences, except verbal, in the ways we… comprehended the truth.”
His search for traces of monotheism in the religious systems of the Hindus stems, he says, from his faith in the Qur’an, which states that God has, from time to time, sent prophets to all peoples to preach the worship of the One.
Thus, he goes on to add:
And it can also be ascertained from the Holy Qur’an that there is no nation without a prophet and without a revealed scripture, for it has been said: ‘Nor do We chastise until We raise an apostle’ [Qur'an: XVII, 15]. And in another verse: ‘And there is not a people but a warner has gone among them’ [Qur'an: XXXV, 24]. And at another place: ‘Certainly we sent our apostles with clear arguments, and sent down with them the Book and the Measure’ [Qur'an: LVII, 25].
Dara expresses this concern in his Persian translation of the Upanishads, the Sirr ul-Akbar (‘The Great Secret’) thus:
And whereas I was impressed with a longing to behold the Gnostic doctrines of every sect and to hear their lofty expressions of monotheism and had cast my eyes upon many theological books and had been a follower thereof for many years, my passion for beholding the Unity [of God], which is a boundless ocean, increased every moment. [.] Thereafter, I began to ponder as to why the discussion of monotheism is so conspicuous in India and why the Indian [Hindu] mystics and theologians of ancient India do not disavow the Unity of God, nor do they find any fault with the Unitarians.
It was his these works which were later used be religous orthodoxy in his trial to declare him an apostate and legalize his political murder
DARA’s fight agaisnt religious orthodoxy;
Dara’s next book on Islamic Sufism is the Hasanat ul-’Arifin or ‘The Aphorisms of the Gnostics’. It consists of the sayings of 107 Sufis of various spiritual orders. Explaining the objective behind writing the book, Dara says in his introduction:
I was enamoured of studying books on the ways of the men of the Path and had in my mind nothing save the understanding of the Unity of God; and before this, in a state of ecstasy and enthusiasm, I had uttered some words pertaining to sublime knowledge, because of which certain bigoted and narrow-minded people accused me of heresy and apostasy. It was then that I realised the importance of compiling the aphorisms of great believers in the Unity of God and the sayings of saints who have, hitherto, acquired knowledge of Reality, so that these may serve as an argument against those who are really imposters.
In the Hasanat ul-’Arifin, Dara bitterly criticises those self-styled ‘ulama who, ignoring the inner dimension of the faith, focus simply on external rituals. His critique is directed against mindless ritualism emptied of inner spiritual content, and he challenges the claims of the ‘ulama who would readily trade their faith for worldly gain. Thus, he says:
May the world be free from the noise of the Mulla
And none should pay any heed to their fatwas.
As for those ‘ulama who claim to be religious authorities but have actually little or no understanding at all of the true spirit of religion, Dara writes that, ‘As a matter of fact, these are ignoramuses to themselves and learned to the ignorant’, and adds the following couplet:
Every prophet and saint suffered afflictions and torments,
Due to the vicious and ignominious conduct of the mulla.
Orthodoxy extracted its revenge on the inclusive spirit of DARA and used his sufi teachings and books as a proof of heresy and gace his brother Aurangzeb the justification to murder him
Dara on Sufism;
Dara was a Sufi of the Qadiri tareeqa an wrote extensively about Sufism. The Safinat ul-Auliya, a biography of several leading Sufi saints, was Dara’s first work, composed in 1640 C.E., when he was just 25 years of age. Here he stresses the importance of the Sufi pirs or guides, because, he believes, one can attain knowledge of the mystical path only through the assistance of a spiritual master. In Dara’s words, ‘God never leaves his people without saints to guide them. [.] Therefore, next to the prophets, there are no other persons than the saints nearer in the presence of God, the Almighty’. The true saint is a ‘perfect guide’ (pir-i kamil), for, ‘No one is more compassionate and magnanimous, erudite and practical, humble and polite, heroic and charitable than the members of this hierarchy of the saints’.
The Safinat ul-Auliya is Dara’s second biography of various Sufi saints. Unlike the Sakinat ul-Auliya, which deals with Sufis of various orders, this book discusses only the Qadri Sufis of India. Dara himself was a Qadri, and as he puts it, ‘Nothing attracts me more than this Qadri order, which has fulfilled my spiritual aspirations’. The Qadri order, one of the most popular and widespread of all the Sufi silsilahs, traces its origins to the Prophet through the twelfth century Sufi and Islamic scholar of great renown, Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jilani of Baghdad. The Sakinat ul-Auliya was completed in 1642 C.E., when Dara was 28 years old, three years after his first meeting with the Qadri Sufi Miyan Mir. In the same year, Dara came into contact with another leading Qadri saint, Mulla Shah Badakshani (d. 1642 C.E.), who, like Miyan Mir, exercised a particularly powerful influence on Dara, which is readily apparent in his description of the practices of the Qadris in the Sakinat ul-Auliya.
Two short, yet important, works of Dara on the various stages and practices associated with the Sufi path are the Tariqat ul-Haqiqat and the Risala-i Haq Numa.
The text goes on to discuss the thirty stages (manazil) on the Sufi path, the first of which is detachment from the materialistic world and the last of which is realisation of the Truth. Broadly the same theme is discussed in the Risala-i Haq Numa, where the seeker (salik) is shown as starting from the Alam-i Nasut or ‘The Physical Plane’, and, passing through various stages, finally reaching the Alam-i Lahut or ‘the Plane of Absolute Truth’. Some of the physical exercises employed by the Sufis that are described in the Risala-i Haq Numa are shown by Dara to be similar to those used by the Hindu Tantriks and Yogis. These include astral healing and concentration on the centres of meditation in the heart and brain. Further, he suggests that the four planes through which the Sufi seeker’s journey takes him-Nasut , Jabrut, Malakut and Lahut-correspond to the Hindu concept of the Avasthanam or the four ‘states’ of Jagrat, Swapna, Shushpati and Turiya.
Dara established close and cordial relations with mystics from various backgrounds. Among these were several jogis and sadhus, about some of whom Dara also wrote. One such sadhu was Baba Lal, follower of the renowned Sufi-Bhakti saint Kabir and founder of a small monotheistic order named after him as the Baba Lalis. Many of the teachings of this sect can be traced to a distinct Sufi influence. A summary of these teachings is to be found in Dara’s Makalama Baba Lal wa Dara Shikoh, which consists of seven long conversations between the Baba and Dara held in Lahore in 1653 C.E.. These seven discourses were composed originally in Hindawi, and were later translated into Persian by Dara’s chief secretary, Rai Chandar Bhan. As in the case of Dara’s translation of the Yoga Vasishta, this text focuses particularly on certain similarities in the teachings of Hindu and Muslim mystics.
DARA as a poet:
One of the most intriguing works of Dara’s is his collection of poems, the Diwan, also known as the Iksir-i ‘Azam. Some of the verses from the Diwan, given below, suggest the train of Dara’s mystical thought:
On Monotheism [tauhid]
Look where you can, All is He,
God’s face is ever face to face.
Whatever you behold except Him is the object of your fancy,
Things other than He have an existence like a mirage.
The existence of God is like a boundless ocean,
People are like forms and waves in its water.
Though I do not consider myself separate from Him,
Yet I do not consider myself God.
Whatever relation the drop bears with the ocean,
That I hold true in my belief, and nothing beyond.
We have not seen an atom separate from the Sun,
Every drop of water is the sea in itself.
With what name should one call the Truth?
Every name that exists is one of God’s names.
On Divine Love ;
O Thou, from whose very name rains Love abundant!
And from your message rains Love!
Whoever passes through Your street realises
That indeed from the very door to the terrace of Your house rains l love!
On the Mystical Path
Turn to none except God,
The rosary and the sacred thread are but only a means to an end.
All this piety is conceit and hypocrisy,
How can it be worthy of our Beloved?.
Kingship is easy, acquaint yourself with poverty,
Why should a drop become a pearl when it can transform itself into an ocean?.
Hands soiled with gold begin to stink,
How awful is the plight of the soul soiled with gold!
Day and night you hear of people dying,
You, too, have to die. How strange is your behaviour!.
The more a traveller is unencumbered,
The less he feels worried on his journey.
You, too, are a traveller in this world,
Take this as certain, if you are wakeful.
Drive egoism away from you,
For, like conceit and arrogance, it is also a burden.
So long as you live in this world, be independent,
The Qadri has warned you!
Whoever recognised this, carried the day,
He who lost himself, found Him.
And he who sought Him not within his own self,
Passed away, carrying his quest along with him.
The Qadri found his Beloved within his own self,
Being himself of good disposition, he won the favour of the Good.
To whatever object you may turn your face, He is in view,
Are you blind, for why do you assign Him to yourself?
Dara On The Religious Systems of the Hindus
Among the most noteworthy distinguished Sufi poet that Dara Shikoh was attracted to was Sarmad, a truly remarkable man who was beheaded by Aurangzeb. Indeed, Dara Shikoh seems to have been in the middle of the entire literary, spiritual, and intellectual movement that was to propel Lahore as a centre of a liberal tradition not known in the subcontinent before. His spirit still pervades the way we think, a sort of detached tolerance to every point of view. The execution of Dara by his brother Aurangzeb led to this tradition being badly dented.
- See more at: http://lubpak.com/archives/49466#sthash.FzpfN67w.dpuf