Jodha Akbar 100b: The demands of Rajadharma - Page 3

Originally posted by: sashashyam

No, Sara, I did not forget it. You are in the few hardy souls mentioned later. Do see the PS as well. Aap bahut jaldbaazi mein rehti hain!😉

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: sashashyam

Folks,

After doing my post on the centenary episode of Jodha Akbar, which I at least found curiously unsatisfactory, I read several other posts in the forum, all interesting in different ways and all overflowing with relief. This celebratory mood was only deepened by the charming Jalal-Jodha scenes of last night , in an episode that was as light and airy and delightful as a successful souffl. I have not written about this one as it has been covered more than adequately already.

Facile optimism:But I was still left wondering at, and somewhat dismayed by the insouciance with which all but a very few in the forum had brushed aside Jalal's statement in the Diwan-e-Khas, during the continued confrontation with the ulema bent on dethroning him unless Jodha converted to Islam, offering to abdicate.

Jalal said then that he could not take back his zubaan to Jodha that she was free to practice her religion and she would not be forced to convert, nor could he go against the ulema. So, if they so desired, he would give up the throne, and nominate Rahim Khan-e-Khana to be his successor.

Almost the whole forum applauded Jalal for his nobility (very likely because this zubaan was given to Jodha; if it had been one given to Ruqaiya or to Mahaam, the voting would have been 99:1 in the opposite direction!😉).

Hardly any gave even a passing thought to the likely consequences of Jalal's abdication, not only for Jalal, but for the whole awaam across his huge empire. If at all a few thought about it, they saw it as a very astute siyasati chaal by Jalal, to rule by proxy thru his foster son for a decade or more, and then perhaps even take the throne back when the dust had long since settled.

This was facile optimism at its most acute, felt in total disregard of the political ground realities prevailing in the Mughal empire. Far from being a very clever piece of statecraft, this throwaway statement by Jalal (which the historical Jalal would never have contemplated even in his worst nightmares) would have resulted in an unmitigated disaster of huge proportions. Let me try to explain why, and if you read what follows with an open mind, you will have to agree with me.

Nor is this a purely theoretical non-issue, on the all is well that has ended well principle. Going by the Sharifuddin-Ulema scene yesternight, the butparasti issue has not been finally buried; it can very well resurface. If it does, Jalal cannot afford to repeat his previous performance. Here is why.

The abdication offer:As I has written in my post of yesterday on the centenary episode, Jalal seemed curiously passive at the hearing. Apart from his insistence on his zubaan to Jodha, he was strangely ready to cave in to the power of the clergy. There was, at the moment of truth, none of the fire with which he had declared, just a little earlier, that if the maulvis had not been the custodians of the faith, he would have decapitated them on the spot. In fact he threw in the towel straightaway, and not only accepted that they had the right to dethrone him, but was ready to step down at once. He only added that he would nominate Rahim to assume the throne in his place.

This was simply unbelievable, that an emperor would be prepared to quit this throne, abandon his subjects, and leave them to suffer from all the chaos, instability, civil war and all that would inevitably follow, simply I order to be seen to keep his word to his wife. This was not rajadharma in any form, it was the negation of it. A king should be prepared to suffer hellfire if necessary to protect his subjects, and here we have a Jalal who thinks of nothing but his own self-indulgent virtue.

And how did Jalal imagine that the ulema who have, thanks to his lack of resistance, acquired the power to dethrone him, were going to accept his choice of a successor? That too a 4 year old, whose father was one of the most hated men in the Mughal sultanate? How long did Jalal think Rahim would stay alive even if the ulema accepted him as the heir? It was such an ill-considered, kneejerk statement that I did not know what to make of it.

Disaster ahead: For those indulging fond hopes of a takhtheen Jalal ruling by proxy thru Rahim, thus continuing pretty much as he was doing till now bar his title, a reality check would be in order. Here it is, folks, and everything I have said here is not speculative. It would assuredly have come to pass.

First and foremost, it would not be in Jalal's hands to choose his successor once the ulema had got him dethroned for a crime against Islam, butparasti. Not Rahim, nor anyone else. It is unimaginable that the clergy, having declared him a sinner unfit to rule, would let him rule by proxy. No way.

The minute he was dethroned, Jalal would become a non-person, deprived of the protection of the Mughal sultanate. Exactly what happened to Bairam Khan once he was no longer the Wazir--e-Ala would happen to Jalal. Adham would have him killed at the very earliest. Killing Jalal would have been essential because his lineage would always have made him a dangerous rallying point for the awaam, whatever the religious charges against him.

There would next have been an all out power struggle, between Adham, Sharif and other claimants as well.

Rahim would have been killed too, to prevent any of the Jalal loyalists from rallying behind him, as Jalal's designated successor once Jalal had been disposed of.

The eventual winner of the power struggle would have tried to marry Ruqaiya to get the legitimacy that would go with her true blue nasl-e-Timuri ancestry, as Babur's paternal granddaughter. Jodha would have to kill herself to escape being recruited into the successor's harem, and Hamida would have been dumped in some corner of the palace, if she was not disposed of as well.

In all of this, the common people, especially in the areas recently conquered by the Mughals, would have been abandoned to the tender mercies of Adham Khan and his ilk. Law and order would have collapsed in the war that would have raged between the contenders for the throne and the armed forces under them. The Mughal army would have been divided and leaderless, and would have degenerated into an armed rabble, split up among the various warlords at each other's throats.

They would have looted, burnt and pillaged their way to power, and those suspected of harboring loyalty to Jalal, whether courtiers and Ministers like Atgah Khan, or at lower levels, would have been killed in short order.

That, folks, is exactly what would have happened. A succession struggle for an imperial throne is not a civilised tea party. It is a bloodbath. Aurangzeb murdered all his brothers and imprisoned his father to get to the throne, and Shahjahan too had his brother and his cousin killed to secure his accession. And in their succession struggles, the common people suffered the most.

Jalal got the throne on a plate thanks to the loyalty of Bairam Khan, and his present empire thanks to his Khan Baba's military and political skills. So he should have valued his takht all the more. I am sure the historical Jalal did so value it.

Jalal's irresponsibility: To revert to our Jalal, when he was coronated as the Shahenshah-e-Hind, he undoubtedly swore a sacred oath that he would protect his subjects and to provide them with peace and security. This oath and his commitment to the people, should have, for Jalal, taken precedence over all else. A Indian Army cadet takes an oath that the country will come first for him, always and every time. So should it have been for Jalal.

Which is why it was irresponsible and criminally foolish of Jalal to risk all of the above, especially the terrible consequences for his subjects, just to be able to say that for him, pran jaye par vachan ne jaye, as if he had been a reincarnation of the Raghukul Shromani Lord Rama.

Jodha's single point thanksgiving: Finally, a few hardy and skeptical souls, who had echoed my above critique of Jalal, had also wondered about Jodha offering thanks to her Kanha only for having saved her faith, without a single thought for the disaster that would have befallen her new family and the whole Mughal empire if Jalal were to step down. It is not that she is not aware of what would then happen; Hamida Banu warns her about it on the sole occasion when she scolds her, after the tiger attack from which Jalal nearly dies. But then Jodha is like a frog in a well, a princess from a tiny riyasat whose ideas of imperial power and the dangers of its collapse are very limited. Plus she is terminally self-centred.

Moreover, why blame her alone when not only is Jalal ready to betray his oath to his subjects and risk their lives and security because of his obsession with a woman (I doubt, somehow, if he would have reacted the same if the zubaan had been given to, say, Motibai!😉) , but Hamida Banu too says Jalal ki siyasat Jalal jaane, par Mughal sultanate ne Jodha Begum ko zubaan di thi aur woh barkarar rahegi. With such defenders, only Allah could have saved the Mughal awaam from the CVs of Jodha Akbar!

Shyamala B.Cowsik

PS: A propos Jalal's statement yesternight that he had never had time to pay attention to the beautiful moonlight, and he did not see the point in wasting time looking at the full moon, Sara (smile.sara) has cleverly pointed out that this is completely at odds with what the selfsame Jalal said when Atgah Khan proposes the boat ride on the lake to him. I had missed it, but she remembered that Jalal then specifically says that to be on the lake in the moonlight ka lutf toh kuch aur hi hoga.

That time, of course, Jodha Begum did not seem to derive any of the aseem shanti from bathing in the moonlight that she was talking of this time, as part of her bhashan of the day, or rather of the night. Her one man audience did not remind her of it, for he was presumably suffering from short term amnesia, like Aamir Khan's character in Ghajini!😉