Question

Write a short note on the conclusion of Delhi sultanate

Answer 1

The Sultanate, generally, was viewed as an Islamic state and the Sufis' support towards the Sultanate seemed plausible and logical. The Sufis, however, did not view the Sultanate as purely Islamic, as it deviated from the principles of Islamic statehood to a great extent. A true Islamic state would be a reflection of the system of the early Caliphate. Hence, their support towards the Sultanate was not unconditional, but issue based. Muslim statehood initially was formed wit~ the assumption that sovereignty belongs to God 1 and the Sultans or the Kings were representatives of God 1, who were supposed to rule on the basis of Shari' at, rule of law and equity. The head of the state was not a hereditary one, but was selected or elected on the basis of consensus.2 In this, the wisest, the pious and the popular people played a vital role. The law making process was not arbitrary, but based on consensus or consultations. In the light ofthis, the early Caliphs refused to nominate their successors and left the choice to the people. The "right going" Caliphs (the first four) did not regard themselves above law; instead they declared themselves at par with other people, both Muslims and non-Muslims.3 They also appointed judges, who, they declared, had the powers to give verdict against the Caliph4 and uphold justice at any cost. Thus, in a court of Zaid when Umar, the second Caliph was given 230 respect as due· to a Caliph when he came there as a party to a case, Umar declared that Zaid was unfit to be a judge so long as Umar and an ordinary man did not stand equal in his eyes. 5 Another feature of an ideal Islamic state, as prescribed by the early Caliphs, was to treat the treasury or Bait al-Ma/ as the trust from God and the people. The Sultans were forbidden to use the money for the fulfillment of their personal needs and the wars which were uncalled for. 6 Thus, the concept of kingship or statehood in Islam was democratic and welfare oriented. The selection of Iltutmish as the ruler and his and Sultan Nasir al-Din's rule, broadly followed the above said principles of Islamic state, to a reasonable extent. They did not indulge in luxury, administered justice scrupulously and led simple and pious lives. However, successive rulers specially Balban and thereafter indulged in court grandies and etiquette and the projection of a higher self image, mainly to put the am irs on hold, denying them the right to choose the successor to the throne. The theory of the Divine origin of kingship was brought into the picture by projecting themselves, as the representatives of God and disobedience to them would be disobedience to God. This theory was in sharp contrast to rule of law and equality before law practiced by the early Caliphs that was symbolic of ideal Islamic state.