# Ziauddin Barani

Ziyauddi Barani (1285 – 1357) was a Muslim political thinker of the Delhi Sultanate located in present-day Northern India during Muhammad bin Tughlaq and Firuz Shah's reign. He was best known for composing the Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi (also called Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi), a work on medieval India, which covers the period from the reign of Ghiyas ud din Balban to the first six years of reign of Firoz Shah Tughluq and the Fatwa-i-Jahandari which promoted a hierarchy among Muslim communities in the Indian subcontinent

## Quotes

* According to Ziauddin Barani, ‘In the course of four or five days, preparations were made for idol warship in the palace’ and ‘Copies of the Holy book (Quran) were used as seats, and idols were set up in the pulpits of the mosques.’
** Elliot & Dawson, Vol. III, p. 224. quoted in Khan, M. A. (2011). Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery. ch 4
* ‘Kingship is the army and the army is the kingship,’ wrote Barani, implying the central importance of a powerful army in the plunderous Muslim rule and conquest.
** attributed and quoted in M.A. Khan , Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery (2011)
* [As early as in the time of Sultan Iltutmish (1210-1236), soon after the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate in 1206, some Ulama suggested to him to confront the Hindus with a choice between Islam and death. The Wazir Nizamul Mulk Junaidi replied:] “But at the moment in India… the Muslims are so few that they are like salt (in a large dish). If such orders are to be enforced… the Hindus might combine… and the Muslims would be too few in number to suppress(them). However, after a few years when in the capital and in the regions and small towns, the Muslims are well established and the troops are larger, it will be possible to give Hindus, the choice of ‘death’ or ‘Islam’.”
** Ziyauddin Barani, Sana-i-Muhammadi, trs. in Medieval India Quarterly, (Aligarh), I, Part III, 100-105. quoted from Lal, K. S. (1994). Muslim slave system in medieval India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 5, also in K.S. Lal, Legacy of Muslim rule in India, 1992., also in Jain, M. (2010). Parallel pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim relations, 1707-1857.

### Fatawa-i-Jahandari

* Teachers of every kind are to be sternly ordered not to thrust precious stones down the throats of dogs… that is, to the mean, the ignoble, the worthless. To shopkeepers and the low born they are to teach nothing more than the rules about prayer, fasting, religious charity and the Hajj pilgrimage along with some chapters of the Quran and some doctrines of the faith without which their religion cannot be correct and valid prayers are not possible. They are to be instructed in nothing more. They are not to be taught reading and writing for plenty of disorders arise owing to the skill of the low-born in knowledge… The disorders into which the affairs of the state are thrown are due to the acts and wards of the low-born, who have become skilled. (Advice XI)
** Quoted from Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they. Chapter 2.
* “The low-born, who have been enrolled for practising the baser arts and the meaner professions, are capable only of vices…”
** Quoted from Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they. Chapter 2.
* [the foreign Muslims (or Turks)] “alone are capable of virtue, kindness, generosity, valour, good deed, good works, truthfulness, keeping of promises… loyalty, clarity of vision, justice, equity, recognition of rights, gratitude for favours and fear of God. They are, consequently, said to be noble, free born, virtuous, religious, of high pedigree and pure birth. These groups, alone are worthy of offices and posts in the government… Owing to their actions the government of the king is strengthened and adorned.” [On the other hand the] “low-born” (Indian) Muslims are capable only of vices - immodesty, falsehood, miserliness, misappropriation, wrongfulness, lies, evil-speaking ingratitude,…shamelessness, impundence… [So they are called] low-born, bazaar people, base, mean, worthless, plebian, shameless and of dirty birth”.
** Quoted from Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they. Chapter 2.
* [What worried him most was that the Indian Muslims were appointed to] “high offices and are successful in their work… they will make people of their own kind their helpers, supporters, colleagues. They will not allow (Turkish) nobles and free-born men and men of merits to come anywhere near the affairs of the government.”
** Quoted from Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they. Chapter 2.
* Ziyauddin Barani voiced his opinion against the Hanafi school when he wrote as follows in his Fatwa-i-Jahandari: “If Mahmud… had gone to India once more, he would have brought under his sword all the Brahmans of Hind who, in that vast land, are the cause of the continuance of the laws of infidelity and of the strength of idolators; he would have cut off the heads of two or three hundred thousand Hindu chiefs. He would not have returned his Hindu-slaughtering sword to its scabbard until the whole of Hind had accepted Islam. For Mahmud was a Shafiite, and according to Imam Shafii the decree for Hindus is Islam or death, that is to say, they should either be put to death or accept Islam. It is not lawful to accept jiziya from Hindus who have neither a prophet nor a revealed book.”
** Fatwa-i-Jahandari, quoted from Goel, Sita Ram (2001). The story of Islamic imperialism in India. ISBN 9788185990231 and quoted in [Introduction to Asian Civilizations] - Sources of Indian Tradition. V. 1. From the Beginning to 1800 1 (1988, Columbia University Press) also in Jain, M. (2010). Parallel pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim relations, 1707-1857.
* “It is the duty of a king to enforce, if he can, those royal laws which have become proverbial owing to their principles of justice and mercy. But if owing to change of time and circumstances he is unable to enforce the laws of the ancients (i.e. ancient Muslim rulers), he should, with the counsel of wise men… frame laws suited to his time and circumstances and proceed to enforce them. Much reflection is necessary in order that laws, suited to his reign, are properly framed.”
** Fatawa-i-Jahandari, p.64. quoted from Lal, K. S. (1992). The legacy of Muslim rule in India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 4
* “Consequently, it became necessary for the rulers of Islam (the Caliphs) to follow the policy of Iranian Emperors in order to ensure the greatness of True Word, the supremacy of the Muslim religion… overthrow of the enemies of the Faith… and maintenance of their own authority.”
** Fatawa-i-Jahandari, p.39. quoted from Lal, K. S. (1992). The legacy of Muslim rule in India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 4
* [Slaves, for instance, made good soldiers but] “they are of one group and one mind and there can be no permanent security against their revolt.”
** Barani, Fatawa-i-Jahandari, pp.25-26. quoted from Lal, K. S. (1992). The legacy of Muslim rule in India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 4
* The Muslim king will not be able to establish the honour of theism (tauhid) and the supremacy of the Islam unless he strives with all his courage to overthrow infidelity and to slaughter its leaders (imams), who in India are the Brahmans. He should make a firm resolve to overpower, capture, enslave an degrade the infidels. All the strength and power of the king and of the holy warriors of Islam should be concentrated in holy campaigns and holy wars; and they should risk themselves in the enterprise so that the true Faith may uproot the false creeds, and then it will look as if these false creeds had never existed because they have been deprived of all their glamour. On the other hand, if the Muslim king, in spite of the power and position which God has given him, is merely content to take the poll-tax (jizya) and tribute (kharaj) from the Hindus and preserves both infidels and infidelity and refuses to risk his power in attempting to overthrow them, what differences will there be in this respect between the kings of Islam and the Rais of the infidels? For the Rais of the infidels also exact the poll-tax (jizya) and the tribute (kharaj) from the Hindus, who belong to their own false creed, and fill their treasuries with money so obtained; in fact, they collect a hundred times more taxes.
** Ziauddin Barani, Fatawa-i Jahandari, in Mohammad Habib, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad:Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp 46-47. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus.
* Further, if the kings of Islam, despite their royal power and prestige, are content to preserve infidels and infidelity in return for the tribute and the poll-tax, how can effect be given in this world to the following tradition of the Prophet: "I have been ordered to tight all people until they affirm `There is no God but Allah'; but when they affirm this, their lives and properties are protected from me, subject to the law of Islam (as between Muslims)." The Divine object in sending one hundred and twenty four thousand prophets has been to overthrow infidels and infidelity and this has also been the object of early and later Muslim kings. But the succession of prophets has come to an end with our holy Prophet and the liquidation of infidelity through the preachings of prophets is no longer possible. Consequently, the overthrow of infidelity and the disgrace of infidels and polytheists is now only possibly if the king, after all necessary arrangements, concentrates his courage and his high resolve on this one object in order to win the approval of God and the Prophet by establishing the supremacy of the true Faith. But if the king is content merely to take the poll-tax and the tribute from the Hindus, who are worshippers of idols and cow-dung, and the Hindus are able with peace of mine to preserve the customs of infidelity, then, of course, infidelity will not be liquidated, truth will not be establish at the centre and the True Word will not be honoured.
** Ziauddin Barani, Fatawa-i Jahandari, in Mohammad Habib, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad:Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp 46-47. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus.
* It is possible, nevertheless, that kings through their determined efforts may, first, put their governments in order and then with their high resolve risk their power, dignity and prestige so that the true religion defeats and prevails over the false creeds, the traditions of Islam are elevated, and what has been designed by Providence comes to pass by the establishment of truth at the centre. But it is necessary for kings to understand what the establishment of truth at the centre means, so that they may devote their lives to striving for it, deeming it to be the main objective for the attainment of which they should be prepared to risk themselves and their supporters. The kings in reward for their efforts in this enterprise, which has been the object of prophets, caliphs, saints, and truthful men (siddiqan) as well as of the earlier and later kings of the Muslim community, will obtain in this world praises for their good deeds which will last till the Day of Judgment and in the next world they will have the status of prophets, truthful men, saints, and of those near to God (muqarribin) and a share of that Divinely promised blessing, "which the ear has not heard of and the eye has not seen." Also, by that increase of spiritual rewards that is due to kings, such rulers will be blessed in Paradise by a variety of good things, while love for them will survive in the hearts of the people of this earth and their good deeds will be recounted generation after generation. The religious perfection of the Muslim kings lies in this-they should risk themselves as well as their power and authority and strive day and night to establish truth at the centre. The sons of Mahmud and kings of Islam ought to know that in the Sunni faith the establishment of truth at the centre is both excellent knowledge and excellent action. This is the highest of all good works with the exception of the mission of the prophets.
** Ziauddin Barani, Fatawa-i Jahandari, in Mohammad Habib, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad:Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp 46-47. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus.
* Sons of Mahmud' and kings of Islam! You should with all your royal determination apply yourself to uprooting and disgracing infidels, polytheists, and men of bad dogmas and bad religions, if you wish that you may not have to be ashamed before God and his Prophets and that in your record of life-concerning what you have said and done, the clothes you have worn, and the food you have eatenthey may write good instead of evil. You should consider the enemies of God and His Faith to be your enemies and you should risk your power and authority in overthrowing them, so that you may win the approval of God and the Prophet Mohammad and of all prophets and saints. You should not content yourself merely with levying the poll-tax and the tribute from the infidels and you should not allow infidelity to be preserved in spite of your royal power and authority. You should strive day and night for the degradation of infidelity so that (on the Day of Judgment) you may be raised (from your graves) among the prophets and be blessed with the sight of God for all eternity and "may find a seat among the truthful near the Powerful King of (God)."
** Ziauddin Barani, Fatawa-i Jahandari, in Mohammad Habib, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad:Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp 46-47. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus.
* The majority of religious scholars and wise men of early (Islamic) as well as later time have been sure that if Muslim kings strive with all their might and power and the power of all their supporters on this path, the following objects will be attained:-the true Faith will gain a proper ascendancy over the false creeds; the True Word will be honoured; the traditions of infidelity and polytheism will be weakened; Musalmans will be favoured and honoured; infidels and men of bad faith will be faced with destitution and disgrace; the orders of the unlawful state and the opposed creeds will be erased; the laws of the shari'at will be enforced on the seventy-two communities; and the enemies of God and the Prophet will be condemned, banished, repudiated and terrorised.
** Ziauddin Barani, Fatawa-i Jahandari, in Mohammad Habib, The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad:Kitab Mahal, 1961, pp 46-47. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus.
* If the desire for the overthrow of infidels and the abasing of idolators and polytheists does not fill the hearts of the Muslim kings; if, on the other hand, out of the thought that infidels and polytheists are payers of tribute and protected persons, they make the infidels eminent, distinguished, honored, and favored; if they bestow drums, banners, ornaments, cloaks of brocade, and caparisoned horses upon them; if they appoint them to governorships, high posts, and offices; and if in their capital [Delhi?] where the raising of the banners of Islam raises those banners in all Muslim cities, they allow idol-worshipers to build houses like palaces, to wear clothes of brocade, and to ride Arab horses caparisoned with gold and silver ornaments, to be equipped with a hundred thousand sources of strength, to live amid delights and comforts, to take Muslims into their service and to make them run before their horses, with poor Muslims begging of them and at their doors in the capital of Islam, through which the palace of Islam raises itself, so that Muslims call them kings, princes, warriors, bankers, clerks, and pandits [brahman scholars]—how, then, may the banners of Islam be raised?
** [From Barni, Fatawa-yi-fahandari, [folios 120-120b]
* If the kings of Islam, with all their majesty and power, take for granted infidelity and infidels, polytheism and polytheists throughout their domin- ions in return for the land revenue (kharaj) and jizya, how will the tradition, “If I fight people until they say, ‘There is no god but God,’ and if they say, ‘There is no god but God,’ they are immune from me and their persons and property exist only by virtue of Islam,” be observed? And how will infidelity and infidels, polytheism and polytheists be overthrown—the purpose of the mission of 124,000 prophets and the domination of sultans of Islam since Islam appeared? If the kings of Islam do not strive with all their might for this overthrow, if they do not devote all their courage and energies to this end for the satisfaction of God and of the prophet, for the assistance of the Faith and the exalting of the True Word; if they become content with extracting the jizya and the land tax from the Hindus who worship idols and cow-dung, taking for granted the Hindu way of life with all its stipulations of infidelity, how shall infidelity be brought to an end, now that Muhammad’s Prophethood has come to an end—and it was by the prayers of the prophets that infidelity was being ended? How will “Truth be established at the Center” and how will the Word of God obtain the opportunity for supremacy? How will the True Faith prevail over other religions, if the kings of Islam, with the power and prestige of Islam that has appeared in the world, with three hundred years of hereditary faith in Islam, permit the banners of infidelity to be openly displayed in their capital and in the cities of the Muslims, idols to be openly worshiped and the conditions of infidelity to be observed as far as possible, the mandates of their false creed to operate without fear? How will the True Faith prevail if rulers allow the infidels to keep their temples, adorn their idols, and to make merry during their festivals with beating of drums and dhols [a kind of drum], singing and dancing?
** [folios 119a-b] quoted in Ainslie T. Embree - Sources of Indian Tradition_ Volume One_ From the Beginning to 1800. 1-Penguin Books (1991) 441 ff also in Jain, M. (2010). Parallel pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim relations, 1707-1857.
** Variant: Should the king consider the payment of a few tankas by way of jiziya as sufficient justification for their allowing all possible freedom to the infidels to observe and demonstrate all orders and detail of infidelity, to read the misleading literature of their faith, and to propagate their teachings, how could the true religion get the upper hand over other religions, and how could the emblems of Islam be held high? How will the true faith prevail if rulers allow the infidels to keep their temples, adorn their idols, and to make merry during their festivals with beating of drums and dhols, singing and dancing? - Quoted from Goel, Sita Ram (2001). The story of Islamic imperialism in India. ISBN 9788185990231

### Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi

* “In the year AH 689 (AD 1290), the Sultan led an army to Rantambhor… He took… Jhain, destroyed the idol temples, and broke and burned the idols…”
** About Sultan Jalalu’d-Din Khalji (AD 1290-1296) conquests in Jhain (Rajasthan) Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own historians, Vol. III, p. 146
* “ ’Alau’d-din at this time held the territory of Karra, and with the permission of the Sultan he marched to Bhailsan (Bhilsa). He captured some bronze idols which the Hindus worshipped and sent them on carts with a variety of rich booty as presents to the Sultan. The idols were laid before the Badaun gate for true believers to tread upon…”
** About Sultan Jalalu’d-Din Khalji (AD 1290-1296) conquests in Vidisha (Madhya Pradesh) Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own historians, Vol. III, p. 148
* “At the beginning of the third year of the reign, Ulugh Khan and Nusrat Khan, with their amirs and generals, and a large army marched against Gujarat… All Gujarat became a prey to the invaders, and the idol, which after the victory of Sultan Mahmud and his destruction of (the idol) of Manat, the Brahmans had set up under the name of Somanat, for the worship of the Hindus, was carried to Delhi where it was laid for the people to tread upon…”
** About Sultan ‘Alau’d-Din Khalji (AD 1296-1316) conquests in Somnath (Gujarat) Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own historians, Vol. III, p. 163
* The Sultan then asked, "How are Hindus designated in the law, as payers of tributes or givers of tribute? The Kazi replied, "They are called payers of tribute, and when the revenue officer demands silver from them, they should tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths to receive it. The due subordination of the zimmi is exhibited in this humble payment and by this throwing of dirt in their mouths. The glorification of Islam is a duty. God holds them in contempt, for he says, "keep them under in subjection". To keep the Hindus in abasement is especially a religious duty, because they are the most inveterate enemies of the Prophet, and because the Prophet has commanded us to slay them, plunder them, enslave them and spoil their wealth and property. No doctor but the great doctor (Hanafi), to whose school we belong, has assented to the imposition of the jizya (poll tax) on Hindus. Doctors of other schools allow no other alternative but Death or Islam.
** Tárikh-i Firoz Sháhi, of Ziauddin Barani in Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III : Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. pp. 184, chapter 15. Tárikh-i Firoz Sháhi, of Ziauddin Barani
** Different translation: "and should the collector choose to spit into his mouth, opens the same without hesitation, so that the official may spit into it.' KS Lal, Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India, pp. 238-39n124. also quoted in Bostom, A. G. M. D., & Bostom, A. G. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Amherst: Prometheus. Also quoted in Ibn Warraq, Defending the West.
** Different translation: As the learned Qazi Mughis-ud-din declared to Ala-ud-din Khalji, in accordance with the teaching of the books on Canon Law :—*“The Hindus are desig- nated in the Law as ‘payers of tribute’ (kharaj-guzar) ; and when the revenue officer demands silver from them, they should, without question and with all humility and respect, tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths wide to receive it. By these acts of degradation are shown the extreme obedience of the zimmi, the glorification of the true faith of Islam, and the abasement of false faiths. God himself orders them to be humiliated, [as He says, ‘till they pay jaziya] with the hand and are humbled.’... The Prophet has commanded us to slay them, plunder them, and make them captive...No other religious authority except the great Imam [Hanifa}] whose faith we follow, has sanctioned the imposition of the jaziya on Hindus. According to all other theologians, the rule for Hindus is ‘Either death or Islam.” ’’ (Zia Barani, 290.) in Jadunath Sarkar, "The Islamic State Church in India," History ofAurangzib, vol. 3: Northern India, 1658-1681, pp. 283-97.
* 'Alpau-d dín was a king who had no acquaintace with learning, and never associated with the learned. When he became king, he came to the conclusion that polity and government are one thing, and the rules and decrees of law are another. Royal commands belong to the king, legal decrees rest upon the Judgment of kázis and mufis. In accordance with this opinion, whatever affair of state came before him, he only looked to the public good, without considering whether his mode of dealing with it was lawful or unlawful. He never asked for legal opinons about poitical matters, and very few learned men visited him. Kázi Mughpisu-d dín, of Bayánah, used to go to court and sit down in private audience with the amirs. Once day, when the efforts were being made for the increase of the tribute and of the fines and imposts, the Sultán told the Kazi that he had several questions to ask him, and desired him to speak the plain truth. The Kazi replied, "The angel of my destiny seems to be close at hand, since your Majesty wishes to question me on matters of religion; if I sepak the truth you will be angry and kill me." The Sulpan said he would not kill him and commanded him to answer his questions truly and candidly. The Kazi then promised to answer in accordance with what he had read in books.... The Sultán smiled at this answer of the Kazi's, and said, "I do not understand any of the statements thou hast made; but this I have discovered, that the khuts and mukaddims ride upon fine horses, wear fine clothes, shoot with Persian bows, make war upon each other, and go out hunting; but of the kharaj (tribute), jizya (poll tax), kari (house tax), and chari (pasture tax), they do not pay one jital. They levy separately the Khut's (landowner's) share from the villages, give parties and drink wine, and many of them pay no revenue at all, either upon demand or without demand. Neither do they show any respect for my officers.
** Qazi Mughisuddin to Sultan Alauddin Khalji, in the interpretation of the history of the Delhi Sultanate in Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi by Ziauddin Barani (1285–1358 CE). Published in History of India as told by its own Historians, Vol. III, 8, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. p. 184, chapter 15
* “……Malik Naib Kafur marched on to Ma’bar, which he also took. He destroyed the golden idol temple (but-khanah i-zarin) of Ma’bar, and the golden idols which for ages had been worshipped by the Hindus of that country. The fragments of the golden temple, and of the broken idols of gold and gilt became the rich spoil of the army…”
** About Sultan ‘Alau’d-Din Khalji (AD 1296-1316) conquests in Ma‘bar (Tamil Nadu) Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own historians, Vol. III, p. 204
* Shykh Nuruddin Mubarak Ghaznavi was the most important disciple of Shykh Shihabuddin Suhrawardi, founder of the second most important sufi silsila after the Chishtiyya, who died in Baghdad in 1235 AD. Ghaznavi had come and settled down in India where he passed away in 1234-35 AD. He served as Shykh-ul-Islam in the reign of Shamsuddin Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236), and propounded the doctrine of Din Panahi. Barani quotes the first principle of this doctrine as follows in his Tarikh-i-Firuzshahi. “The kings should protect the religion of Islam with sincere faith… And kings will not be able to perform the duty of protecting the Faith unless, for the sake of God and the Prophet’s creed, they overthrow and uproot kufr and kafiri (infidelity), shirk (setting partners to God) and the worship of idols. But if the total uprooting of idolatry is not possible owing to the firm roots of kufr and the large number of kafirs and mushriks (infidels and idolaters), the kings should at least strive to insult, disgrace, dishonour and defame the mushrik and idol-worshipping Hindus, who are the worst enemies of God and the Prophet. The symptom of the kings being the protectors of religion is this:- When they see a Hindu, their eyes grow red and they wish to bury him alive; they also desire to completely uproot the Brahmans, who are the leaders of kufr and shirk and owning to whom kufr and shirk are spread and the commandments of kufr are enforced… Owing to the fear and terror of the kings of Islam, not a single enemy of God and the Prophet can drink water that is sweet or stretch his legs on his bed and go to sleep in peace.”
** Shykh Nuruddin Mubarak Ghaznavi (died 1234-35 AD), a disciple of Shykh Shihabuddin Suhrawardi (1144-1234 AD), and one of the founders of the Suhrawardia sufi silsilã in India. He propounded the doctrine of Dîn Panãhî, and presented it to Sultan Iltutmish (1210-36 AD). Quoted from Goel, Sita Ram (2001). The story of Islamic imperialism in India. ISBN 9788185990231
** Different translation: Kings will not be able to discharge their duty of protecting the Faith unless they overthrow and uproot kufr and kafiri (infidelity), shirk (associating partners to God, polytheism) and the worship of idols, all for the sake of Allah and inspired by a sense of honor for protecting the din of the Prophet of God... if total extirpation of idolatry is not possible owing to the firm roots of kufr and the large number of kafirs and mushriks, the kings should at least strive to disgrace, dishonor and defame the mushriks and idol-worshipping Hindus, who are the worst enemies of God and His Prophet.
*** Sayyid Nur-u'd-din Mubarak quoted in/by Barani, quoted in "Some Aspects Of Religion And Politics In India During The 13th Century" also in M. Awan, History of India and Pakistan , also in J Singh, Percussions of History , also in S. Sharma, Caliphs and Sultans
* “What is our defence of the faith,” cried Sultan Jalaluddin Khalji, “that we suffer these Hindus, who are the greatest enemies of God and of the religion of Mustafa, to live in comfort and do not flow streams of their blood.”
* The obligation to be the refuge of the faith cannot be fulfilled until they (the kigns) have utterly destroyed infidelity and unbelief, polytheism and idolatry for the sake of God and protection of the true religion. If they cannot wholly extirpate polytheism and infidelity because they have taken root and exterminate the infidels and polytheists because of their large number, it will not be less meritorious if, for the sake of Islam...they use their efforts to insult and humiliate and to cause grief and bring ridicule and shame upon the polytheistic and idolatrous Hindus, who are the bitterest enemmies of God and the Prophet of God. They should not for the glory of Islam and the honour of the true faith permit even a single unbeliever and polytheist to live as a respectable person... or be set in authority over a community or a group, a province or a district. [...] [Qazi Mughis concurred:] Keeping the Hindu in a humble position is one of the essentials of true religiousness.
** Z. Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, 41-42, 290. As quoted in Mujeeb, M., The Indian Muslims, London, 1967. p. 68-69. also in Essays on Indian Freedom Movement, also in Pathway to India's Partition by Prasad. also in Jain, M. (2010). Parallel pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim relations, 1707-1857.
* After the Sultan had thus routed out the Miwdttis, and cleared away the jungle in the neighbourhood of the city, he gave the towns and country within the Doab to some distinguished chiefs, with directions to lay waste and destroy the villages of the marauders, to slay the men, to make prisoners of the women and children, to clear away the jungle, and to suppress all lawless proceedings. The noblemen set about the work with strong forces, and they soon put down the daring of the rebels. They scoured the jungles and drove out the rebels, and the rt/ois were brought into submission and obedience. .... In the year of his accession, the Sultan felt the repression of the Miwdttis to be the first of his duties, and for a whole year he was occupied in overthrowing them and in scouring the jungles, which he effectually accomplished. Great numbers of Miwdttis were put to the sword. ... In this campaign one hundred thousand of the royal army^ were slain by the Miwdttis... In two nights and three days he crossed the Ganges at Kateher, and sending forward a force of five thousand archers, he gave them orders to burn down Kateher and destroy it, to slay every man, and to spare none but women and children, not even boys who had reached the age of eight or nine years. He re- mained for some days at Kateher and directed the slaughter. The blood of the rioters ran in streams, heaps of slain were to be seen near every village and jungle, and the stench of the dead reached as far as the Ganges. This severity spread dismay among the rebels and many submitted. The whole district was ravaged, and so much plunder was made that the royal army was enriched, and the people of Badaiin even were satisfied.
** Elliot and Dawson, Vol. III, (also in Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery (2011), M.A. Khan)
* The first project which the Sultan formed, and which operated to the ruin of the country and the decay of the people, was that he thought he ought to get ten or five per cent, more tribute from the lands in the Dodb. ....The cesses were collected so rigorously that the raiyats were impoverished and reduced to beggary. Those who were rich and had property became rebels ; the lands were ruined, and cultivation was entirely arrested. When the raiyats in distant countries heard of the distress and ruin of the raiyats in the Dodb, through fear of the same evil befalling them, they threw off their allegiance and betook themselves to the jungles... . It continued for some years, and thousands upon thousands of people perished of want. .... [When he sent a force to exterminate the rebels of the mountain of Kara-jal, the rebels cut off the passage of their retreat and the] ‘whole force was thus destroyed at one stroke, and out of all these chosen body of men, only ten horsemen could return to Delhi.’.... At this time the country of the Doab was brought to ruin by the heavy taxation and the numerous cesses. The Hindus burnt their corn stacks and turned their cattle out to roam at large. Under the orders of the Sultan, the collectors and magistrates laid waste the country, and they killed some landholders and village chiefs and blinded others. Such of these unhappy inhabitants as escaped formed themselves into bands and took refuge in the jungles. So the country was ruined. The Sultan then proceeded on a hunting excursion to Baran, where, under his directions, the whole of that country was plundered and laid waste, and the heads of the Hindus were brought in and hung upon the ramparts of the fort of Baran.
** Elliot and Dawson, Vol. III, (also in Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery (2011), M.A. Khan)
* As late as the fourteenth century Ziyauddin Barani wrote that “if they (the Hindus) do not find a mighty sovereign at their head, nor behold crowds of horse and foot with drawn swords and arrows threatening their lives and property, they fail in their allegiance, refuse payment of revenue, and excite a hundred tumults and revolts’’.
** Malik Alaulmulk, quoted in K.S. Lal, Twilight of the Sultanate (1963) p. 287
* After the Sultan had thus routed out the Miwdttis, and cleared away the jungle in the neighbourhood of the city, he gave the towns and country within the Doab to some distinguished chiefs, with directions to lay waste and destroy the villages of the marauders, to slay the men, to make prisoners of the women and children, to clear away the jungle, and to suppress all lawless proceedings.
** in Elliot and Dowson also in Lal, K. S. (1995). Growth of scheduled tribes and castes in medieval India.
* The den of the robbers was thus converted into a guard-house, and Musulmans and guardians of the way took the place of highway robbers.
** in Elliot and Dowson also in Lal, K. S. (1995). Growth of scheduled tribes and castes in medieval India.
* In two nights and three days he crossed the Ganges at Kateher, and sending forward a force of five thousand archers, he gave them orders to burn down Kateher and destroy it, to slay every man, and to spare none but women and children, not even boys who had reached the age of eight or nine years. He re- mained for some days at Kateher and directed the slaughter. The blood of the rioters ran in streams, heaps of slain were to be seen near every village and jungle, and the stench of the dead reached as far as the Ganges. This severity spread dismay among the rebels and many submitted. The whole district was ravaged, and so much plunder was made that the royal army was enriched, and the people of Badaiin even were satisfied. Woodcutters were sent out to cut roads through the jungles, and the army passing along these brought the Hindus to submission.
** in Elliot and Dowson also in Lal, K. S. (1995). Growth of scheduled tribes and castes in medieval India. and Ishwari Prasad, Medieval India
* After the promulgation of these interdicts, the Sultan requested the wise men to supply some rules and regulations for grinding down the Hindus, and for depriving them of that wealth and property which fosters disaffection and rebellion. There was to be one rule for the payment of tribute applicable to all, from the khuta to the baldhar and the heaviest tribute was not to fall upon the poorest. The Hindu was to be so reduced as to be left unable to keep a horse to ride on, to carry arms, to wear fine clothes, or to enjoy any of the luxuries of life... the people were brought to such a state of obedience that one revenue officer would string twenty khats, mukaddims, or chaudharis together by the neck, and enforce payment by blows. No Hindu could hold up his head, and in their houses no sign of gold or silver, tonkas or jitals, or of any superfluity was to be seen. These things, which nourish insubordination and rebellion, were no longer to be found. Driven by destitution, the wives of the khals and mukaddims went and served for hire in the houses of the Musulmans. Sharaf Ki, naibh-wazir, so rigorously enforced his demands and exactions against the collectors and other revenue officers, and such investigations were made, that every single jital against their names was ascertained from the books of the patwdris (village accountants). Blows, confinement in the stocks, imprisonment and chains, were all employed to enforce payment.
** p. 182ff

## About Barani

* Even after his conversion to Islam, the Hindu remained an object of abhorrence... Barani is so maliciously vituperative against Hindus that even many modem Muslim scholars feel embarrassed at his language and find it difficult to defend him. It must, however, be remembered that Barani belonged to the common run of Muslim theologians and chroniclers. He was a personal friend of men like Amir Khusrau and Ala Hasan Sijzi and was a disciple of no less a Sufi than Shaikh Nizamuddin Auliya. He possessed charming manners and was known for his wit and humour. But in the case of Hindus, his wit turned into rage. He is copiously quoted by future chroniclers like Nizamuddin Ahmad, Badaoni and Farishtah, who all praise him highly. Most of medieval Muslim chroniclers wrote in the idiom of Barani; only he excelled them all. All medieval chroniclers were scholars of Islamic scriptures and law. They often quote from these to defend or justify the actions of their kings in relation to their non-Muslim subjects.
** Lal, K. S. (1992). The legacy of Muslim rule in India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 3
* The Indian Muslim nobles, who were local converts, also rose to be officers in the upper cadres, but foreigners were always preferred. The fourteenth century Persian chronicler Ziyauddin Barani, who was born in India but traced his ancestry to a Turki Noble, credits the foreigner Turks with all possible virtues and the Indian Muslims with all kinds of imperfections. The invectives he hurls on the converted Sultan Nasiruddin Khusrau Shah (C.E. 1320), are too well known to need repetition.
** Lal, K. S. (1992). The legacy of Muslim rule in India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 4
* They were known by the generic term Turks and they insisted on monopolizing all key posts and important positions, and maintaining their racial and exotic identity. This attitude was also shared by their children and children’s children, who though born in India, psychologically felt that they were Turks of foreign stock. On the other hand the foreign Muslims treated the Indian Muslim converts with contempt. They were so class conscious that Ziyauddin Barani, who was born in India but belonged to a family of nobles, credits the Turks, both in his Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi as well as Fatawa-i-Jahandari, with all possible virtues and the Indian Muslims with all kinds of vices. ... Conversion to Islam did not change their status, and foreign Muslims looked down upon them. The foreigners especially were not prepared to treat them on equal terms at all. To add insult to injury, the chronicler Ziya Barani, a confirmed believer in the racial superiority of the so-called Turks and baseness of the Indian Muslims, recommends: “Teachers of every kind are to be sternly ordered not to thrust precious stones down the throats of dogs… that is, to the mean, the ignoble, the worthless. To shopkeepers and the low born they are to teach nothing more than the rules about prayer... without which their religion cannot be correct and valid prayers are not possible. They are to be instructed in nothing more. They are not to be taught reading and writing for plenty of disorders arise owing to the skill of the low-born in knowledge…” … Indeed all neo-Muslims were called by the generic but contemptuous term julaha. Surely all the converts could not have come from the weaver caste, but the word julaha became synonymous with the despised low-born Indian Muslim convert. On the other hand the foreign Muslims (or Turks) “alone are capable of virtue, … . They are, consequently, said to be noble, free born, virtuous, religious, of high pedigree and pure birth. These groups, alone are worthy of offices and posts in the government… Owing to their actions the government of the king is strengthened and adorned.” On the other hand the “low-born” (Indian) Muslims are capable only of vices - immodesty, falsehood, miserliness, misappropriation, wrongfulness, lies, evil-speaking ingratitude,…shamelessness, impundence… So they are called low-born, bazaar people, base, mean, worthless, plebian, shameless and of dirty birth”. Now neither the one could be so good nor the other that bad, but Ziyauddin Barani rightly depicts the prevailing attitudes and consequent tensions. What worried him most was that the Indian Muslims were appointed to “high offices and are successful in their work… they will make people of their own kind their helpers, supporters, colleagues. They will not allow (Turkish) nobles and free-born men and men of merits to come anywhere near the affairs of the government.”....In short, there was a constant and bitter struggle of wit and influence for power going on between the “foreign” Turks and Indian Muslims - Indian Muslims both high and low. Although the claim of nobility of birth by purchased slaves makes little sense, the Turks felt that they belonged to blue blood and as founders of Muslim rule in India, they deserved special consideration. It was their right to keep to themselves all high offices, for they possessed merit and were superior to the julahas.... In this strife, the foreign Muslims had an edge. They were closer to the sultan and wielded influence with him. They were ever doing research on the ancestry of Indian Muslim officers, and informing the king about their origins and genealogy with a view to denigrating them and attempting at the removal of those who had ‘infiltrated’ into it. Ziyauddin Barani derives a cynical pleasure in writing about the exclusion and expulsion of low-born Muslims from state employment.
** Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they.
* There is no denying the fact that Ziyauddin had his prejudices, his weaknesses and his handicaps.... But after all these decuctions have been made, the Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi remains the greatest book that has survived to us from the Sultanate period. Its eminence in this respect is unchallengable; and so long as the history of India is studied, Barani cannot be ignored...
** K.S. Lal, Studies in Medieval Indian History, 1966
* Ziyauddin's sarcasm is incisive. Occasionally his sardonic humour helps him to sum up his ideas in a few words. His remark that in Alauddin's days " a camel could be had for a dang," but wherefrom the dang?" - shows at once how the reforms of Alauddin had made articles cheap and people poor.
** K.S. Lal, Studies in Medieval Indian History, 1966
* Ziauddin Barani [Diyā al-Dīn Baranī: 1285-1357] who was an Indian jurist, historian, political thinker, writer, and a companion of Sultan Muhammad b. Tughluq [1309 –1388], wrote a Fürstenspiegel, a Mirror of Princes, akin to Machiavelli’s The Prince, the Fatāwā-yi Djahāndārī, in order to educate the de facto rulers of the day, the sultans, in their duty towards Islam in an age of corruption. Barani advises sultans to enforce the sharī‘a, to curb unorthodoxy ( especially speculative philosophy, falsafa), to degrade the infidel, who must be treated harshly. The Sultans must fight like the Prophet until all people affirm that “there is no God but Allah.” It is the duty of Muslim rulers to overthrow infidelity, uproot it completely, and apply the Holy Law, the Sharia on all.
** The Islam in Islamic terrorism: The importance of beliefs, ideas, and ideology, 2017 Ch 15
* Zia-ud-Din Barani is one of the most widely read authors of pre-Mughal India.
** quoted in DAVID GILMARTIN, BRUCE B. LAWRENCE - Beyond Turk and Hindu_ Rethinking Religious Identities in Islamicate South Asia, 220.