Chapter 14

The Unitarian world of Bullhe Shah

It was noted earlier that most Sufis considered the sharia an

intermediary between God and man which was to be overcome for

the sake of essential union with God. In this connection Hallaj

understood the dangers involved in reducing religion to its form and

excluding man individual initiative from its domain. Though he

himself observed the legal duties, he took an important step towards

questioning the absolute and divine status of the sharia by

suggesting that in certain circumstances, instead of going to Mecca,

the hajj could be performed in a corner of one's own home. This

train of thought was not pursued further by mainstream Sufism. At

the same time, however, it did not abandon the idea in theory,

because this inevitably followed from the Unitarian doctrine of the

Quran. Insofar as the concept of the Law is based on the outward or

dualistic notion of the divine unity of the Quran, it loses its relevance

as one realizes its inner Unity. To put it another way, the Law cannot

be absolute since it is derived from the outward duality of God and

man. As long as one does not transcend this duality by way of

personal transcendence from earthly condition, one cannot

affirm God as the ultimate reality of all things. Thus both Ibn

Arabi and Rumi affirmed that as the individual realized the

all-embracing reality of God underlying varied religions, he

transcended the boundaries of formal religion. That is, in

the state of Unity, or in the consciousness of all-embracing

unity, there was no place for any religion except, as they

put it, the religion of love, in which one was neither a

Muslim nor a non-Muslim.

In practice, though, adherence to the Law was sustained. Still, certain

practices were developed which, from the orthodox point of view,

were not strictly in the orbit of the Law, or which were seen as bida

the practices unknown during the life of the Prophet. For instance,

besides such practices as indulgence in sama, dance and intense

ascetic exercises and above all the concept of the divinity of the Sufi

master, were approved by the 'ulam'.

There was however a group of Sufis, the Qalanders, who had

questioned the validity of the Law on the path of Unity in both

theory and practice. They were not content with merely amending it

with certain practices but went on to overthrow what they

understood as the yoke of the Law from their lives. Their line of

thought found further impetus alter the rise of neo-orthodoxy with

Ahmad Sirhindi. In order to establish the authority of the

sharia the latter had denounced all Sufism by emphasizing

the absolute dualism as the core of religion, on the one

hand, and made certain serious innovations in the domain

of the sharia, especially introducing his own status as a neo-

prophet who had realized certain dormant aspects of

prophecy, on the other. Thus a great exponent of the sharia

whose claim of being the supreme legal authority of the second

millennium was endorsed by a wider consensus, had himself brought

the edifice of the concept of the finality of the sharia to the ground.

While Sirhindi’s success in 'turning the tables against the Sufis' and

subjecting Sufism to the rigours of the Law has been acknowledged,

what has not been realized is that he was greatly instrumental in

weakening, if not breaking, the fragile coalition between the sharia

and Sufism that had been lingering on since Hallaj. There were other

factors which contribute in this development. While Akbar's new

world order had demonstrated that greater harmony among a larger

humanity could be realized if the state was independent of the

sharia, the disintegration of the Mughal empire after

Aurangzeb’s theocratic rule further established that

government under the dictates of the sharia, especially in a

multi-religious society, only alienated people from each other

and was far from a fair recipe for realizing justice, truth and

peace on earth.

To put it differently, Islam had faced a unique situation on its advent

in India, for now it had to govern a multi-religious, multi-cultural

society in which it found itself in minority. How was it to tackle this

situation?

Two altitudes emerging right at the outset have so far been

discerned: Islamic orthodoxy advocated rule according to the

sharia which implied that the Indian Muslims as a whole

were a distinct community the monolithic chosen

community of God, enjoying the divine sanction to treat the

majority population, infidels as they were, as damned and enemies

of God.

The other attitude was that of the Chishtis who

representing a remarkable development in the history of

Islam, did away with such ideas of a homogeneous

community. They visualized the society more in cultural

than religious terms. That is they took Sufism as

representing a way of life whose practice and ideals were'

distinct from the one advocated by the rulers and their allies, the

'Ulamas'.

This idea again had its roots in the Quranic doctrine of Unity

which recommended the development of a transcendental

culture as distinct from the existing materialist-dualist

culture. The former, by its ideal of total renunciation the

world, ensured the presence of God on the earth.

However, the new element was that the Chishtis, as against

the early Sufis of the Caliph; period, asserted that the sharia

could no more mediate between them and the state, or

between the worldly and transcendental cultures, it being t

instrument of coercion and oppression in the hands of the

state.

This development would be placed in proper perspective if we

remember that the Chishtis were inheritors of the Persian Sufi

tradition, against, for instance, the Indian Suhrawardis whose parent

order originated in the Arab world; The difference between the two

is evident both their conception of Sufism as well as its relationship

with the sharia and the state.

Sufism had gained greater autonomy vis-a-vis the

state and the sharia as it entered into the Persian

world. It is for this reason Iqbal looked at 'Persian

Sufism' as particularly un-Islamic and made it special

target of his attack as the chief villain responsible for

weakening the bond of the sharia and inner cohesion

of the Community.

Though Ibn Arabi's contribution in the development of the

Unitarian doctrine indicated that this doctrine was not purely

the product of the 'Persian mind', nevertheless the Indian

Sufis had inherited this doctrine in the first place through

Bastami and Abu Sa'id. And insofar as Hallaj was integral link

between Bastami and Abu Said, it became all the evident that from

the ninth century controversy between Hallaj and Junayd

(concerning the inter-relationship between the Law and Sufism) , it

was the former's rather than the latter’s influence that Indian Sufism

was to imbibe.

The significance of this development can be gauged from the

fact that for the first time the formal unity of the Community,

hitherto maintained on the basis of the sharia, had beep-put

to question.

For the Chishtis had declared that the mere fact that the

state adhered to the Law did not oblige them to take it as

their own. Its adherence to the Law was only its exterior, inwardly it

was a worldly institution from top to bottom and the farther one

moved away from it the better for one's spiritual development. On t

other hand they moved closer to the indigenous

transcendental culture and showed a readiness to assimilate

its ideas into their own spiritual framework. Thus they paved

the way for the development of supra- or cross-religious

spirituality.

It was in this context that Akbar and his associates

attempted develop a supra-religious state, i.e. the

state that belonged to all people in contradistinction

to the Delhi Sultanate which, by virtue of its

allegiance to the Law, had maintained a colonial

character. In these circumstances Sirhindi appeared to

rebuild the unity of the state and religion and thus

rehabilitate the classical idea of the Community in which the

ruler and the divine were partners. However the realization

of his dream in Aurangzeb further emphasized the outdated

nature of this idea. The glory of the Mughal Empire was

raised on its national or supra-religious character.

As soon as this was undermined and the state reassumed its colonial

character, and as Spear put it, 'it became the affair of the Muslims',1

the empire began to crumble.

Aurangzeb’s policy of over-centralisation in running of

the state,2 combined with his bigotry and adherence to

dry literalism in religion generated a general alienation

of the individual from the state and society. This had

the disastrous result of weakening the moral bond

between individuals. Self-interest and individual

egoism gradually gained supremacy and public life

became 'a system of plundering' until, by the later part

of eighteenth century, most of India looked like 'a mass

of lawless individuals and confederacies'.3

The insufficiency or inadequacy of the sharia in relation to personal

spiritual development had long been realized, but allegiance was

owed to since it claimed to provide the basis of a superior moral-

social code which ensured the cohesion of the Community as a

distinct entity.

Now it seemed to have exhausted even that potential. It is

interesting to note that, discussed earlier, the advent of Islam

in India helped Indian spirituality, chiefly at the hands

of Kabir, to free itself from its outdated form. In its

turn, the Indian experience, in which Islam found itself

in minority confronting the powerful ancient spiritual

traditions, contributed in questioning the validity of

the sharia as an adequate code for running a 'multi-

religious social reality. But while Akbar's new order had

shown this, Sufism had yet to provide its critique of the

sharia in the times when it merely a shadow of its

original character.

Bullhe Shah endeavoured to meet this need. The

Qadiris, some of we have met in the last pages, had

lately taken up the mantle of the Chishtis. Bullhe Shah

comes as their last outstanding exponent in the

Punjab.

The sources of Bullhe Shah's poetry

Bulleh Shah disclose the presence of universals

through local metaphors and images.

The genius of Bullhe Shah and indeed of all Indus valley poets

who chose native languages as the medium of their

expression is derived from what Shackle very aptly describes

as the blending of the native image and forms of local

poetry 'with the resources of the classical tradition’. 23 This

classical tradition, comprising the Persian Sufi poetry, and the

local tradition consisting of folk elements are the two key

concepts developed by Shackle towards the understanding of

Indus valley literatures. 24 classical tradition also embraces

what he calls 'Islamic style' which of the poets' obvious use of

Islamic theological terms and sometimes verses from the

Quran. This manifests the consciousness of the origin

and continuity of a long spiritual tradition on part of

the poets.

The symbiosis of the classical tradition with that of

local is born of the fact that these poets were primarily

committed to the common people around them and

their propagation of Sufi ideas did not serve the

purpose of 'the tickling of the critical fancies of a

sophisticated and cultured circle'.25

Among the folk elements Shackle also includes Hindi

words that we encounter in the poets of the region. But

then he also mentions the ‘Indian' or 'Hindi style to account for the

features 'deriving rather from the classical literary tradition of North

India, most notably embodied it Braj poetry, than from the local folk

tradition'.26 However for the sake precision it seems worthwhile to

include this style into local tradition as the case of Islamic style

incorporated into the classical one This evidenced by the fact that

the local tradition is heavily imbued with the non-

Islamic yogic tradition founded by Gorakhnath who in

the Punjab - believed to be of Panjabi origin.27 The

popularity of the yogic tradition in the Punjab is

visible in the character of Ranjha, the hero of folk as

well as of the Panjabi Sufi literature, who is at once

faqir and jogi (Panjabi version of yogi.) so much so

that very often one is the other.28 That local tradition

is the unity of folk and yogic elements is manifested

abundantly in all the three major poets of the central

Panjab, Shah Husain, Waris Shah and Bullhe Shah,

more particularly in the latter two.

It is Waris Shah's Heer, Shackle observes,

in which the local and the classical are balanced and played off against one another in that

perfect fashion which seems to be granted only one author at a given time in any

literature.29

The observation can be supplemented in the way that

such distinction may be achieved by only one author in

one genre at a time, for what Waris accomplished in

the Qissa (narrative) Bullhe Shah did in the kafi.

Secondly, in Waris the impact of the Nath-Yogic

tradition is so apparent that it would be impossible not

to include this tradition into the broader category of

local tradition. Bullhe Shah too, as will be seen, is

heavily saturated in yogic tradition both in his thought

and character.

One important source of non-Muslim influences on

Bullhe Shah was his association with the Shattari order.

In most sources Bullhe Shah and Shah Inayat are

frequently given the double epithet Qadiri Shattari. This

is a fact of significance in the study of our poet though it has hitherto

not found due consideration.31 While in some accounts Shah

Inayat is said to be the successor, gaddinashn, of Miyan

Mir in Lahore.32 or simply the great Qadiri divine of

Lahore, in others he is mentioned as the disciple of a

Shattari master, Shah Muhammad Raza.33 It is noteworthy

that Ghulam Sarwar has used the epithet Qadiri Shattari with all

three from Shah Raza to Bullhe Shah which lends support to

Jalalpuri's view that at some level the two orders had developed a

close co-ordination with each other.34 This, according to him, was

due, among others, to the proximity of their receptive approach

towards Yoga and Hindu spirituality in general.35 Shah Inayat

himself, to whom some four books on spiritual knowledge are

attributed, provided an account in his Dastur al-Amal of all the

methods being used by Hindus for salvation since ancient times.36

The best-known names of Shattari Sufis in Lahore are Sayyid Abu

Tarab or Shah Gada (d. 1661) and Shaikh Fatch Shah Shattari (d.

1737-38) a contemporary of Shah Inayat.37 Some scholars have

seen so much Indian influence on Bullhe Shah that they lend

lo describe him as predominantly a vedanlic thinker. Rama

Krishna, for instance, observed that in later part of his life he

had become a firm believer in advaita' resembling no Sufi or

Vaisnava of the Panjab or the rest of India.38

While the theory is open to question,39 it nevertheless

underlines the deeper influence or Indian spirituality

on Bullhe Shah.

The very style of visualizing God as man or husband

and the lover, the poet himself, as woman or wife,

taken up by Bullhe Shah is peculiarly Indian. In short,

we can say that in Bullhe Shah both classical as well

as local traditions manifest, when analysed further,

two styles or constituents: Islamic and Persian on the

one hand and folk and Indian on the other.40 40 An interesting instance of the blending of the Islamic and Indian elements, which, as will be seen presently,

forms part of his Unitarian doctrine, is the kafi with the refrain ‘holi kheloo gee parh Bismillh’, I will play holi

initiating with Bismillh. The poem is in Hindi idiom interspersed with references to the Quran. Faqir, op. cit., p.

335.

What Sorley called 'the web of many strands' to

describe the poetry of Shah Abd al-Lalif,41 Bullhe Shah's

great Sindhi contemporary, may equally be applicable

to the latter.

Bullhe Shah's Style

Ironically, what is most difficult in Bullhe Shah's work is the

simplicity and apparent naivety of his style, which can be well

described as distinctly oral.

The difficulty lies in the complexity of themes concealed behind -

simple form, betraying the impression of common speech or

conversation or looking like plain folk verses, with great artistic

intricacy.

This was well described by a scholar in these words:

Bulleh Shah, a man of great erudition.....composed in sophisticated

metrical form, created complex rhyme schemes as no other

practitioner of Punjabi verse has done before and since his times. Yet

he succeeds in getting across a rough oral effect, as if the poems he

composed were a spontaneous everyday expression.42

Khalid Ahmad, op. cit., p. 16.

As already noted in the discussion, this seemingly deceptive style has

been regarded by a contemporary Panjabi writer as a recurrent

pattern of Panjabi poetry.43

Above, chapter 10.

The pattern is evolved out of the poet's endeavour to draw

from the life around him and in this way he is able to reach

even to those who are not at the higher level of culture

among his audience. No wonder that in the present-day Punjab

the audience accustomed to the heavily orchestrated form of the

poetry of the court languages of Persian and Urdu created in 18th and

early 19th century fail to decipher the inner complexity of themes in

Panjabi poetry. The failing has led them ‘to treat Punjabi poetry as an

indistinguishable variety of popular balladry'.

Najm Hosain regards the distance between the

apparent simplicity and inner complexity as of great

artistic value. For this ‘distance generates a dramatic

tension on which depends the gradual development of

the poet's meaning'.44

44 Syed, 1968, pp. 10-11 ff.

Even if we regard Bullhe Shah's style as a manifestation

of a recurrent pattern of Panjabi poetry, as Najm

Hosain suggests, it still has the distinction of its own

that comes from the near perfection realized in what

may be called as the oral or speech form of his poetry.

It is this quality which makes his style inimitable, at the

same time this can be considered as the culmination of

the poetic form of common speech which had had

before him a long history in North India, originating

with the dohras of Farid.

In Bullhe Shah’s time Persian and Arabic were not only the languages

of a small elite but had also become the symbols of convention and

orthodoxy. Arabic, although the language of Muslim scriptures and

legal duties, was incomprehensible even to the ordinary clergymen.

Persian on the other hand was the language of the court, aristocracy

and administration. The choice of Persian as the language of

expression, along with some kind of relationship with the court,

guaranteed orthodoxy in Sufi doctrine. In this regard Eaton observed:

It was a natural pattern in the history of Indian Sufism that as a Sufi's

political sympathies merged with those of the court, his doctrinal

position generally became more orthodox.45

In his penetrating study of the growth of Sufism in Bijapur, Eaton

points out that it was their desire to maintain the independence of

Sufi life and discipline which led the Chishtis of the fifteenth century

Bijapur beginning with MiranJi Ushshaq (d. 1499), not only to

distance themselves from the court but also to adopt the Deccani,

the predecessor of Urdu, as the vehicle of spiritual expression.46

Unlike Gcsudaraz, who in his zeal to take more orthodox position

attacked Ibn Arabi and other Sufis of liberal disposition, and most

Sufis of other orders, the followers of Ushshaq adhered firmly to the

doctrine of wadat al-wujd. Thus they tended to deviate from Islamic

orthodoxy in terms of both doctrine and practice to an extent nearly

and sometimes wholly incompatible with Muslim Law'.47

A similar pattern or interconnection between orthodoxy, Persian

language and the court can be discerned in Delhi and the Panjab.

Sirhindi who hailed from the area in the Panjab close to Delhi,

represents a typical example of this pattern. Again, Shah Wali Allah, a

contemporary of Bullhe Shah in Delhi, closely followed in his

footsteps. He took pride in being of Arab stock. In his zeal to remain

true to his origin he went even further and chose to write in Arabic

rather than Persian. In gratitude for this twofold blessing of God (of

being of Arab origin and having a knowledge of Arabic) he vowed

never to mix with the habits and customs of the "ajams or the

Indians.48

Bullhe Shah on the other hand belongs to the same tradition

of Sufism as the one to which the Chishtis of Bijapur

belonged. His choice of language seems invariably linked with

the tenor of his thought. For the highly unorthodox colour of his

poetry blossoms organically out of the soil of a freshly cultivated

language. This unity of a popular language with unorthodox thought

made his poetry disturbing for the local religious establishment. In

the following verse he alludes to this:

You have become the lover of God, O Bullha, and earned a hundred thousand

reproaches. But if they insist you are an infidel, you persist in saying, yes, yes, I

am.49

49. Faqir, op. cit., p. 367.

Thus his poetry earned early the reputation of what may be

called a 'faith-breaker'. This is underlined clearly, rather

repeatedly, by a nineteenth century scribe and interpreter of his

poetry, Anwar Ali Rohtaki. He writes:

.....the kafi (s) of Bullhe Shah, saturated in gnosis and unity (tawhid) as they are, become the

food of spirit to a gnostic but a deadly poison for a commoner, who, through reading them,

loses even the little faith he already has. This is like a heavy oily food being beneficial for a

healthy person but the cause of death for a sick one.....Readers arc therefore requested that

they should evaluate their condition (first) and only proceed further if they have the ability

to sustain what follows in the next pages.50

50. Rohtaki, 1913, pp. 16-17. Later (p. 76) he repeats that Bullhe Shah's kafis especially those of ma'rifat and

tawhid, should not be read before the masses, for this would only harm their faith. This reminds one of a

similar caution recommended by a sixteenth- century scholar Ibn Hajar al-Haytami towards the work of Ibn

Arabi, whose writings, he observed, are 'fatal poison' for most readers, and for which reason not every one

should make recourse to them. Chodkiewicz, 1993, [a], p. 1.

A more poetic and elegant appraisal was given by Miyan

Muhammad, one of the last eminent poets of the Panjab:

The kafi of Bullhe Shah breaks the concealed infidelity of the heart. He was also

the one who plunged into and swam in the river of Unity (wadat).

MAJOR THEMES

i) Criticism of the formalist, dualist world-outlook; of

religious bigotry, hypocrisy, ritual worship and restriction of

man's spirituality to the letter and the law. ;

ii) Love (ishq), its identification with God, with man's

essence; its potential to transform human nature.

iii) Contradiction between love and the sharia. Love, insofar

as it reflects a yearning for the personal experience of the

truth' creates vigour and enthusiasm on the path of spiritual

realization. The Law, on the other hand, thwarts individual

initiative and offers no possibility for transcendence from the

given human condition.

iv) The realization of man's separation from God; Bullhe

Shah's own experience of separation and struggle with his

self. The separation is also expressed as that from his master.

Shah Inayat.

v) Experience of freedom and transcendence; refusal to fit

into the given forms and assertion that oneness with God

can be attained through the negation of all inherited

attributes.

vi) Truth; the agony that truth must be expressed, that it

would inevitably find resistance since it is contrary to the

given human condition.

vii) Unity of course forms the paramount theme. God's

unity, the oneness of all being, is the core subject

around which his whole thought revolves and which

finds expression in multiple ways and images.

While a comprehensive critique of Hindu ritualism and blind-worship

had been accomplished by the Sants, such work had been largely

undone in the world of Islam.

Though Sufism grew in part due to dissatisfaction with the ritual and

the Law, yet the criticism of Islamic orthodoxy, its clergy, dogma, and

ritual became mute after the early persecution of the Sufis

culminating in the execution of Hallaj.

Consequently, while moderate Sufism gained ground through fervent

efforts to prove its orthodoxy, executions of those Sufis who tried to

step over moderation, though not frequent, ensured that Islamic

Law, clergy and ritual would not be subject to biting and open

criticism!

Bullhe Shah, following in the footsteps of Bahu, look it upon himself

to realize this largely undone work in the Indo-Muslim culture. Just

as his Sant predecessors had refused to accept the Brahmans as

sacred cows and unreservedly challenged the hollowness of the

sanctity woven around them, so did Bullhe Shah act in relation to

Islamic orthodoxy. In this way he can be seen to be in

league with the Sant movement insofar as it aimed at

liberating the human spirit from the authority of the

clergy and religious dogma and renew its relation

with the source of all being. But whereas it is important to

note the influence of Sant leaders on Bullhe Shah, it is equally

imperative that this clement in his growth and thought is not

exaggerated.

It is fairly plausible to assume that he was well aware of the

thought of Namdev, Kabir. Nanak and other Sant leaders in

particular through the Granth which was compiled and

current in the land where he grew up. But though his

association with the Vedantists in his early life has also been noted

by some scholars,52 yet extending these elements in his development

to the extent of turning him into a Vedantist, as Rama Krishna tried

to do seems untenable.

Shackle, in arguing for caution in this regard, noted two tendencies

among the local critics of the Sufi poets of the Punjab. While on the

one hand those from Islamic faith seem more impatient to establish

'the poet's ideological rectitude, in conformity with the prevalent

neo-orthodoxy of contemporary Pakistani Islam', Hindu and Sikh

writers, on the other hand, look more fond of presenting them as

'expounders of Vedantic monism'." Rama Krishna's view is a typical

instance of the latter. She makes Bullhe Shah like a 'pious

Muhammadan' in his early life and an apostate later.

This assertion seems hypothetical on more than one grounds. Firstly,

she has divided Bullhe Shah's life into three periods. In the first he is

presented as a student of Shah Inayat, writing Sufi verse but in

traditional mould which 'though graceful and charming, is yet weak

in thought'.

During this period, we are told, he 'was still attached to his Islamic

theological ideas which later on he shook off entirely'! In the second

phase 'he resembles both the advanced type of Sufi and a vaisnava

devotee' and in the third, ceasing to be either, 'he is a firm believer

in advaita and sees that all pervading spirit, God, in all and

independently of all religions'.54

54. Rama Krishna, pp. 49-54. It is interesting that similar approach was shown by another Hindu scholar

towards Shah Lalif (d. 1652), Bullhe Shah's contemporary Sufi poet of Sind. Sec Schimmcl, 1962, pp. 177-8.

Rama Krishna has also quoted verses corresponding to each stage.

The difficulty in this whole scheme is that there is no evidence to

suggest the division of Bullhe Shah's life or poetry in the three

phases. Only a precise account of his life can warrant such

arrangement and we have seen that the record of his life available to

us is extremely scanty.

Thus putting his poetry in a neat succession of three phases can only

be regarded as a wishful conjecture. Secondly, the idea that

Bullha derived his Unitarian world view from advaita

originates from the assumption that the doctrine of

Unity is essentially foreign to Islam. This we have seen

is not true. Bullha would have only needed to step

into Advaita if there were not any possibility of seeing

'all pervading spirit, God, in all and independently of

all religions' within the Islamic tradition. Further, his

criticism of Islamic orthodoxy, its clergy and its dualistic world view,

which forms a substantial part of his work, is meaningful only if we

see the evolution of his thought within the Sufi tradition. His

frequent references to (he Quranic verses, which appear in no less

than 17 kafis and often more than once in a single poem,55

55. Cf. Faqir, op. cit., pp. 16-7, 18, 63, 106-7, 153-6, 162, 169-70, 206, 211. 216,

231, 251, 267. 308, 312, 327, 335.

It indicates that he seeks to emphasize that Unity

forms the heart of the Quran. But it is important to

remember that his perception of the Quran is same as Kabir's

attitude towards the Hindu scripture. And it is here that the

latter’s influence on him appears vital: For he, like Kabir, while being

deeply embedded in the scripture, is at the same time opposed to its

deification at the hands of its orthodox adherents.

Thus his goal in the Islamic context is the same as

Kabir's in the Hindu tradition; i.e. to establish the

decadent nature of existing religious form and free

spirituality from its mould, or, to distinguish the

eternal from the temporal and free religion from its

absolute character.

As a starting point of Bullha's treatment of this theme, it

would be useful to read a small poem in the praise of the

sadhu, in Hindi idiom, which underlines not only his distance

from the puritanism of Islamic clergy but also his belief that

the path of spiritual realization was open to all it being

beyond the pale of formal religions:

What shall we call this wondrous Sadhu? Moment after moment he makes on a new form. He talks of Mecca and Lanka, and reveals the same secret behind both. O yogi, when you will unite with the Lord, the bang and nad will mean the same. To know the meaning of devotion and devotee, he indeed is a devotee who pleases His Heart. See the Lord manifest everywhere, wherefore do you recite the Vedas, O pundit? Look attentively, there is no infidel, whether you call Him Hindu or a Muslim. Wherever I look, Him alone I find. O Bullha the beloved pervades in every form. What shall we call this wondrous sadhu? 57

This picture of the sadhu may be compared with the following one of the Muslim clergyman and scholar. Read just an alf and that will ensure your release.

The alf (the first letter of the Arabic, Persian, and Panjabi alphabet) in the refrain stands for Allah, as well as for Ahad, and ik (for one in Panjabi).

Why have you become like an executioner? 58 Why do you read cartloads of books? You are (indeed) carrying a heap of calamities on your head: and the path ahead is difficult and hard. You commit the Quran to memory to be (called) a hafiz you repeat its recitation to purify your tongue, but your attention is fixed on expectation of eatables (from people). Indeed your mind wanders like a messenger.

(Leave everything besides and) read just an alf, that will ensure your release.59 Bullhe Shah's evaluation of the representatives and ideologues of Islamic orthodoxy is indeed shocking. Often he is bitter, even contemptuous of them. He compares the mullah with the lamp-man (masalchi). Both provide others light but are ever in darkness themselves.60 This is because the mullah is divorced from the source of light, as the following poem shows. Through the symbolism of letters, which

would be further discussed presently, Bullha underlines the clergyman's occupation with be, the second letter of the alphabet, which symbolizes other (than God), at the expense of alif. His own resistance to reading anything after alif in the face of mullah's oppressive insistence that he must come to be illustrates his spirit's inner affinity with alif: The mullah oppresses me, the mullah oppresses me. He taught me a lesson. I could not learn anything beyond alif. But he keeps insisting on be. The mullah

oppresses me, the mullah oppresses me.61 In the following poem Islamic orthodoxy is subjected to scathing criticism for its pride in knowledge of the Law and its duties and

observances. This knowledge is again contrasted with the alf, which, as above, seems to stand as much for Allah as for knowledge of Unity. The former, the acquired knowledge, leads to egotism and affirms man's duality with his essence and thus leads him to a terrible self-ignorance and consequent deformation of his personality. He has eyes, but he cannot see, he is surrounded by light

but it cannot penetrate the pores of his body, he teaches men ways of right living but eats food of dubious origins and so on. And it is the mullah, the jurist, the scholar all submerged into an archetypal character who is being addressed and questioned: Enough of this knowledge, O friend: all you need is a single alf.

Knowledge is endless, while life is fleeting and undependable. What you need is a single Alif, enough of this knowledge, dear. Enough of this knowledge..... You are busy in reading and writing all the time; heaps of books you have collected all around. Indeed you are surrounded by light, but within (you) is darkness. (So that) if someone asks you the way (to deliverance) you have no answer. Enough of this knowledge.....62 You are reciting prayers day and night. While calling others to prayers you make great show of it. You mount the pulpit and deliver sermons. O this knowledge has really ruined you. Enough of this knowledge..... When I read the lesson of love, having seen the river of Unity I plunged into it. When I was entangled in its eddies and whirlpools, it was Shah Inayat who saved me. Enough of this knowledge. O friend.63 The point he seems to underline is: why to stick to the knowledge that produces such a character? Bullha is able to see through the hypocrisy of the advocates of formal religion. Through his ridicule of them he leaves no doubts about the bankruptcy of their character and is emphatic in his assertion that they are incapable of having any claims about the moral leadership of the society. Compare the following kafi which begins with an exceedingly mocking refrain: What kind of repentance is this repentance, O friend; O no, do not do such repentance. Repentance from the lips, but not from the heart, why can t you get rid of such repentance. What heedlessness has veiled your mind, why should the Merciful show mercy on you?

You give one and receive quarter or half more. How can one be a Muslim who has such a character? What sort of repentance is this repentance O friend; O

no. do not do such repentance.64

Bullhe Shah does not restrict his criticism to the exponents of Islamic orthodoxy. He is fundamentally a social critic and takes them as the representatives of the prevailing human condition. However, he takes note of

the people around who are engaged in futile observances. Even the ascetic practices, such as wandering in jungles and long fasting are no different than the pilgrimages and the prostrations of the pious, mockingly described as aiOveO mathh zamn ghas d, 'a futile rubbing of the forehead on the ground'.65

Outward behaviour and rites have overshadowed God, as if they precede Him, so that if the rites are observed, He is appeased. God, on the contrary, asks for love and surrender, and this is the essence of all the holy books: Those seeking Hajj go to Mecca; for me my beloved Ranjha is Mecca; I am mad indeed. Those seeking Hajj go to Mecca; my beloved in my own home is my Mecca: I am mad indeed. Wherever the beloved is, there is the Kaba, you may look into the four holy books; I am mad indeed.66

The great loss that accrues from preoccupation with external is the loss of sincerity and faith in the Lord, which is the crux of all spirituality. This is described in rather

unusual terms in the following, one of his best known poems: You keep awake in the nights for prayers; (but) in the night’s also awake the dogs. (In this) they are above you. They do not stop barking, and quietly lie down on the garbage. They are above you. They do not leave the door of the master, even if they are beaten with shoes. Buy something for your Journey, O Bullha, lest the dogs take the lead over you.

In South Asia and the Middle East dog, the central image of this kafi, has traditionally been regarded as a foul and impure creature. In the Sufi literature, however, it appears recurrently as a symbol of sincerity and selfless love. Cf. Nurbakhsh, 1989, pp. 47-71. However the dog is also symbolized negatively. Nafs, or the given human condition, is often described as a dog which is never satisfied.

Bullhe Shah contrasts the world view of the representative of formal religion who is sometimes the mullah, at others the aalim with that of the lover (aashiq). Through this comparison he is able to show the inherent gulf between the two. His endeavour to establish the autonomy of the lover’s world outlook is best expressed in the following verse, bearing a highly violent tone, in which the sacred institutions of all three religions: Islam, Sikhism, and Hinduism, are seen as monuments of sin and falsehood: In the Sikh temple dwell the dacoits and in the Hindu temple the cheats. In mosques live

those hollowed of truth (or sinners); the lovers remain aloof (from these places).68

Aashiq or lover is Bullha's primary image for the one who embodies the world outlook, occasionally he employs the words qalandar and yogi. Occasionally he would juxtapose apparently contradictory images to contrast the autonomous world view of the lover.

Also see another highly suggestive kafi with the refrain 'I will set out with the Yogi putting tilak on my forehead’. Further the yogi is described as Nur-r-Ilahi the divine light, who plays the anad flute. It may be noted that anhat is a peculiarly yogi term, which means the unobstructed, spontaneous inner sound that the yogi hears at the moment of liberation (cf. S. Dasgupta, p. 57, note, 7, & p.98). Bullhe Shah's relating of this sound with that of flute, which was the distinctive mark of Krishna and Ranjha, is interesting. In Waris, Ranjha’s flute attracts the multitude but deeply offends the mullah. Bullhe Shah's poetry is conspicuous for his usage of images from his non-Muslim environment. In this way he broadens his spiritual

horizon and highlights the non-formal of his spirituality. Matringe,

while pointing to the extensive Krishnite and Nath references found in his poetry, observes: Concerning the Krishnait tradition, some verses of Bullhe shah advocate

devotion to Krishna as opposed to Vedic ritualism, thus indicating the superiority of inner faith to outward religious manifestations,

and the self-evidence of God.70

While in the above poem the images of Ranjha and yogi overlap each

other, in others Ranjha and Krishna are juxtaposed together. This

indicates through apparent common feature between the two figures in that

both are lovers, and expert flute-players. The melodious sound that they

produce through it makes the listeners forget themselves. Kahan (Krishna) plays the flute wonderfully. Flute-player, cowherd Ranjha, Your melody is shared by all, It is the same melody that is inherent in all. It leaves us unconscious of ourselves.71

His conception of love leaves no traces of social conformity. Whoever seeks to buy love, must first leave his head as a deposit.72 Elsewhere love for the beloved is likened to a beast who drinks blood and cats flesh.73 Again, love is like being fried again and again, and dying again and again while already dead. Love for the beloved cannot be matched by anything in the world.74 However it is of note that here Bullhe Shah is not referring merely to internal suffering. Rather, most of his verses manifest the tone of social confrontation. In other words, while his conception of love is highly social, it also involves categories of conflict and defiance. It demands a life of standing alone in the midst of hostility, it is a life of one's own making. He says:

People cannot bear the truth. They react violently at hearing the truth. They hate the company of the truthful.

But Truth is sweet to the dear lover.75 the given condition

is averse to truth, it reacts to the knowledge of true reality.

The aashiq represents in the society the force in opposition and critical of the established order. 'One in

whom love makes tumult, loses his (given) consciousness. How would he keep quiet who drank the cup of cup-bearer?'76

The following two poems appear as hymns of love, but the treatment of the subject in them is remarkably divergent. If the second is fundamentally polemical in which the poet confronts his outward reality in ferocious terms, in the first he is most gentle and cool, so full of pathos and sadness. Here he is fully with himself, engrossed in his imagination.

In its expression, however, he shows his mastery by employing an image of everyday life, buying and selling, in the voice of a raw poor girl who is suddenly confronted with a situation previously uncontemplated. But the interesting thing is that while the image is commonplace, the thing Offered for sale is unique, and its price more so:

Those merchants have come (again), O mother, those merchants have come. They trade in rubies and they are giving the call (for customers). I heard the call and it came to my mind, I should also buy a ruby: I would put them in my ears and show them to the people. I a simpleton, knowing nothing of the ways of such a deal, proceeded to buy a ruby. Neither having any money nor reputation, see I went off to lose. When I asked them the cost they told me high prices. I had never borne the prick of a needle and they were asking for my head. All those who went to buy the rubies, they lost their heads. Those merchants have come (again), O mother, those merchants have come.77

The second poem is quite opposite in the final impression that it leaves at the end. The power and assertion with which it begins leaves no doubts at the very outset that the concept of love being discussed is extremely unconventional. The anger and satire at the decadence of the religious form and convention is balanced, through the recurring refrain, with the poet's own enjoyment `of the

transforming power of love. And it would not be out of place to say that it is the given human condition which is symbolized through the decadence of religious form: Ever new, ever fresh is the spring of love. When I learned the lesson of love, my heart became scared of the mosque. Frantically I ran into the idol temple, where resound a thousand melodies. Ever new, ever fresh..... Heer and Ranjha have mcl at last. Lost, Hir was looking for him in the woods but found him playing within her own cloak, thus losing her consciousness. Ever new, ever fresh..... I am worn out reading the Quran and Vedas. My forehead is bruised through prostrations.78 But God is neither in the Hindu bathing places nor in Mecca. Whoever found Him, was illuminated. Ever new, ever fresh..... Burn the prayer-mat, break the pot of ablutions. Get away with the rosary and the staff. The lovers arc proclaiming at the top of their voice: Give up the lawful and practise the forbidden. Ever new, ever fresh.... You have wasted your life in the mosque. Your interior is still full of impurity. Never have you realized the prayer of Unity. In vain arc you making a show of your piety. Ever new, ever fresh.... Love made me forget your prostrations. Now why to pick up a quarrel. Bullha has tried to remain quiet, but love keeps attacking fiercely. Ever new, ever fresh is the spring of love.79

In this poem Bullha has touched, in the context of love's contradiction with the given human condition, another of his important themes, i.e., the incompatibility of the sharia with human spirituality. The key lines in this regard are 'when I learned the

lesson of love, my heart became scared of the mosque'. Clearly what he seeks to emphasize is that once one aims for the Lord, the sharia here symbolized by the mosque, loses all validity and one is as good in the mosque as in the temple. In the next stanza the dwelling of the Beloved inside the lover, or the unity of God-man is underlined. Following the denunciation of the worship of the holy books, whether the Quran or the Vedas, rigorous prostrations and pilgrimages to the holy places, Kaba or Hindu bathing places, the path of spirituality is delineated: it is paved with practising the forbidden and renouncing the given, 'give up the lawful and practise the forbidden', (also indicated in running away from the mosque and entering into the temple).

At the same time by calling for namz –e – tawhid, the prayer of Unity, Bullha makes it clear that this is the path prescribed by the Quran, by its essential doctrine of Unity. The poem concludes with the same theme proclaimed above: that one who is the lover of God must proclaim the truth, for such love is unsparing, it must keep attacking what is untrue. By conserving the boundaries of formal religion the Law and its representatives prescribe the sectarian path, for religions are only sects from the vantage point of spiritual consciousness. Thus formal religion, represented by the shar'a in Islam, is seen more like a straitjackct that serves a negative role in the individual's pursuit of creativity and spirituality. Compare these lines which arc noteworthy for their peculiarly personal tone: Come O friend of mine, sec my stale, my soul is wrapped in great torments. I lost you when I was asleep, now I cannot find your trace. I have been robbed in this deserted isolated place, thieves and dacoits have surrounded me. Mullah and the jurist show mc the way of religion; they are the cheats, the petty fishermen who are casting their nets all around. They tell me the ways of piety but in reality arc putting fetters on my feet love does not ask caste and creed, love is the enemy of the Law. Bullhe Shah, you will find your Lord, give your heart courage. For when the beloved b within, whom is to be looked for? You aTb deluded in broad daylight80

It seems for Bullhe Shah the time has arrived for the final resolution of the conflict between love and the Law. The former must free itself from the confines of the latter, which is seen as an instrument of containment, of suppressing latent potential in the individual to go beyond himself. Proclamation of this truth is called infidelity, but actually it is the path of affirmation of divine unity:

Mother, this mad love does not turn back once one is attached with the

beloved. The struggle between love and the law has begun and I am in it putting all at stake. I fail to distinguish between the

faithful and infidels ever since I entered into Unity I have burnt my veil, clothes and hut in the fire of polytheism.81

Elsewhere he says: Now I come to know that love and the law are two poles apart." One has I only to drink a cup of love and he would forget all he has learnt. Logic, grammar, the Kanz and QadrP I forsook all my knowledge. Now I come to know..... What has one to do with prayers and fasts? He who drinks wine is intoxicated. Now I come to know..... The scholarship of the mullahs and pandits could not lead them to the revelation of the

secret. Now I come to know that love and the Law arc two poles apart.84

Bullhe Shah is a Unitarian par excellence and his advocacy of the outdated nature of the Law is derived from the fact that he seeks to take the doctrine of Unity to its logical conclusions. If God is the ultimate reality, he upholds, who manifests Himself in all, then why to enclose Him in the cases of varied religions.

'I have come to know, I have come to know', he says, "it is You who have assumed this beautiful form' (taiO p sarp vai e). Whether the Muslims reading their holy books, or the Bhagats and Hindus doing their services, in every house is He. Whether it is the mosque or temple, it is He who is manifest everywhere.85 He is One but He is in every home. It is He who worships in the mosque and then goes into the temple. The people are gone astray who fail to see Him thus.86

Elsewhere He is called Guru who does what He desires:

Guru does what He wills to do. He says kun fa-yakn ('Be' and there it is) 87 and derives multiplicity from-His unity. Putting on the garment He becomes man and thus assuming, humanity enters into the mosque.

Guru calls Himself Allah, and Himself becomes the Prophet and Ali. He lives in the home of every heart, it is He who fills the empty vessels. 88

In another elaborate poem two themes are interplayed:

That from eternity lovers fought and gave their lives to unveil Him. But whatever has happened, it is He who is the sole actor behind. The descent of Adam, the flood from which Noah escaped, Abraham's falling into the fire. Pharaoh's claim of being God, Moses' going to the mount of Sinai, Jesus' immaculate birth, the fight between Husain and Yazid and the execution of Hallaj and Sarmad, 89 and so forth.

Sarmad, a very learned man who lived the life of a Qalander, was executed in 1661 on the charges of heresy by Aurangzeb, two years after the execution of Dara ShiKoh who happened to be a friend of Sarmad.

Then there are references to Indian history, such as the war between the Kurus and Pandos, Krishna's affairs with the gopis and so on.90

The message is clear: it is all a long process of His unveiling.

Being the core theme of his poetry, Unity finds expression in varied ways. Sometimes he is blunt and straightforward, at others reflective and intricate. Often he utilizes the images of Heer and Ranjha to illustrate the essential unity of the lover and beloved.

A well-known kafi in this form reads: Saying Ranjha Ranjha for long, I myself have turned into Ranjha. Call me Ranjha everyone, for no one should know mc as Heer.

Ranjha is in me and I am in Ranjha, there is no thought of the other now. I am no more and it is he alone who exists, while he takes care of himself. Our essence has to be that which dwells within us. (So) I have

become just like the one whom I love.91

While this is still a poem in traditional mould where there is a rather straightforward expression of unity through ever increasing longing for the beloved, we read below a kafi which shows

the true stature of Bullhe Shah: Who is he in these clothes O girls? Get him to sit next to you and ask him in all devotion, O girls. In his hand is a staff and on his shoulder a black blanket. In his eyes is established light. No, he is not a cowherd, he is a seeker. Who is he in these clothes O girls? Get him to sit next to you..... Who is he in these clothes? Cowherd of any kind? But he does not in the least fancy buffaloes. He is by no means fond of milk and curd. Nor does he look to cat and drink. Who is he in these clothes, O girls? Get him sit next to you..... The beloved is hiding himself, O Bullha. He is not revealing the secret nor talks of anything. My father is seeking my husband from the Kheras, whereas my groom is already near to me. Who is he in these clothes O girls? Get him to sit next to you and ask him in all devotion, O girls.92

Here BuIIeh Shah shows his mastery in diffusing his experience of Unity in the local images of Ranjha, Faqir, chakker (cowherd) and above all of the story of Hir-Ranjha on

which this poem is based. Such is the diffusion that from the beginning to the end one keeps wondering whether it is man, here Ranjha, or God whom Bullha is talking about. Right to the end this question remains fresh and haunting all the time after its reading though one does not feel bothered about the answer. For such is the beauty of man depicted in this poem, and the beauty has such overtones of divinity that deeper one reflects, the more enjoyable the poem becomes. Also notable is the affection and deep rooted devotion with which the lover, the woman, is urging the girls to go and take care of the man who is seeking out his beloved. But there is also a trick played in this poem.

Firstly, Ranjha is never mentioned. Only the chakker is talked about, which was of course Ranjha's role during his stay at Jhang, but again it is advised that he should not be taken as a cowherd. He is looking for something else, he is a lover separated from his beloved. In other words, he is in a guise. He is not what he seems, there is a secret in his heart. The dignity of man, being the manifestation of God, which is variously expressed in Bullhe Shah, may be contrasted to the place: he is given in the dualist framework. In the previous chapter we noted Sirhindi’s Perception of man as a mean sweeper, kanns-i khass ‘evil to the core who dare not identify himself 'with the great Lord and the source of all goodness and perfection'.

The great attraction of the doctrine of Unity in the Islamic world, which gave wide popularity to the works of Ibn Arab, and Rumi, derives from the grand status of man that this doctrine conceives in the framework of whole reality. His evil nature is his given condition but in his inner reality he can attain the goodness and perfection of the great Lord. That is precisely where the spiritual

and religious world views become distinct from each other. The argument that the former brings forth in its support is simple: Who brought Adam into being?' as Bullha puts it, ‘say, where from he comes and where he goes which recalls well-known Quranic verse Inna lillahi wa inna

ilaihi raji'un means ‘we belong to God and to Him we shall return'. He reiterates that God was known, or knew Himself when he created man, i.e., he derived His own Names from the creation of man. Man's being is therefore inalienable from His being. Man knows Him only through the creation 95 above all through himself, he being the medium between the creation and God, the one who mediates between the two:

Now I have seen the beautiful Beloved, whose beauty is displayed brilliantly around. When Ahad, the One, was alone, there was no theophany revealed. Neither there was God nor the messengers, neither Jabbr nor Qahhr. Now I have seen the beautiful Beloved..... The Beloved came into varied garments (forms). He called Himself Adam He became known as the Ahad, and descended as Ahmad, the leader of all the prophets. Now I have seen the beautiful Beloved..... Whoever seeks to see Him (must know him) He cannot be seen without the medium. Shah Inayat told me the secret that opened to me all the mysteries Now I have seen the beautiful Beloved, whose beauty is displayed brilliantly around.97

Bullhe Shah often resorts to letter symbolism, as already noted to express God-man relationship. This kind

of symbolism had a long history in Sufism. Its significance was derived primarily from the pre-eminent position of the Book (Quran), and through it, of words and letters in Islam. It was natural for the Sufis to turn to the symbolic significance of the word, for they understood all creation in its external as well as internal dimensions. Whereas externally every existent carried the marks of its identity, internally it was of the single substance.99 99 In other words, every created thing is the representation of the single reality.

The superior status of the word in all creation is derived first by the fact that it, as kun, was the medium, according to the Quran, through which all creation came into being, or, by means of which God manifested Himself. Secondly, the word embodied divine as well as human thought and knowledge.

However the Sufis were more intrigued by the basic constituent of the word, the letters of the alphabet. And among these it was alf, the first letter, which enjoyed the most prestige. This was because, besides being the first

letter, it stood not only for Allah but also for Ahmad, another name of Muhammad. That is, it represented both the Creator as well as man and the Creation.

No wonder it was understood as the supreme symbol of unity, as, in the words of Schimmel, 'the letter of Unity and Unicity’ 100

100 Ibid., p. 94. Sahl Tustari wrote that God 'is the alf, the one who has

connected (allafa) all things and yet is isolated from all things.' Ibid.

Hallaj, Sanai, Attar, Ibn Arabi, Rum'i and Jami all contemplated on the symbolic strength of alf as well as of other letters.101 101

See ibid., pp. 77-114. Ibn Arabi composed three works on the science of letters expounding its

metaphysical implications (Addas, 1993, p. 220). Of these Kilb al-alif has been translated in English as

The Book of Alif (1984).

Bullhe Shah took up not only Alf as symbol of unity, along with other letters such as Meem, as part of his expression but also employed "Ain and Ghain” as the letters of symbolic significance.

He says: My heart is saturated of Allah's Alf, I am not aware of Be. I cannot make out anything when I read Be, once I got the taste of Alf No distinction appears to me between "ain and ghain; and this is the truth make known to me by Alf. The words of Alf are complete O Bullha, they lead to the purification of heart.102

Here Bullha contrasts Alf, for the One, with Be, the second letter, which is the other, other than God, that does not exist, and of which the poet has no knowledge, no experience. But that is not all, for if it were so, who is Bullha himself, or what of the

creation! Is that illusion? No, the Creator and Creation both are real, but they share the reality of essence.

This core theme of Unitarian Sufism Bullha expounds through the symbols of "Ain and Ghain”. Here the letter ‘Ain’ represents the word 'ain’ which means essence, or substance, whereas ‘Ghain’ is the first letter of the word ghair which means ‘the other’. It is the perception of Unity that has taught Bullha that the supreme essence and man (or creation) are not separate from each other. In duality, or multiplicity they form a single unity. Elsewhere he says:

“Ain and Ghain have the similar forms, with just the difference of a point but the two worlds go around in confusion.”103

The essential unity of God and man is also traditionally expressed through the similarity of Ahad, the One, which is the attribute or a name of God, and Ahmad, which is formed by the insertion of Meem in Ahad, We are told of a hadith Qudsi current in the days of Attar according to which God said, Ana ahmad bil mim (I am Ahmad without the mm).104 Schimmel, op. cit., p. 97.

Bullha says: There is no difference in Ahad and Ahamd, O Bullha; yet there is a little secret of the twist of

mm (between the two).105

The secret to which he is referring is that God has manifested Himself through man. Shabistari too, long before Bullha, had observed that there was only the difference of meem between Ahad and Ahmad and the world was submerged in this meem.106 Schimmcl, op. cit., p. 193, n. 106.

However Bullha more often utilizes the symbol of nuqta, 'point' or 'dot', the one that differentiates ‘Ain from Ghain’ to emphasize the essential unity of man and God. It is interesting that he plays with this word in its dual meanings.

In the following poem fee employs both meanings of nuqta particularly in the refrain: My beloved has taught me a point. My beloved has..... 'Ain and Ghain’ have the same form. But it is the single point which has raised the uproar. My beloved has taught me..... To rob Sassi of her heart, he has come as Hot Punnun.107 My beloved has taught me..... The beloved has no (particular or definite) form O Bullha; I have found him in Shah Inayat. My beloved has taught me a point.108

Bullha's usage of point comes into further relief when we note that nuqta has a special significance in Sufi literature with reference to Alf, the prime symbol of unity, for it was believed that Alf emerges from the point.

Jami held such view109 and long before him Hallaj wrote:

The Quran contains the knowledge of everything. Now the science of the Quran is in its initial letters; the science of the initial letters is in the ‘Iaam meem alf’, the science of the ‘Iaam meem alf’ is in the alf, and that of the alf is in the point.110

And our poet relates Alf with the point in a stanza the following way; Read just an Alf and that will ensure your release. It was first just the Alf, and then it became two three and four, multiplying into thousands and hundreds of thousands, and then growing into countless multitudes. Wonderful indeed is the point of Alf.

In the first line Bullhe Shah is evidently referring to the knowledge and perception of Unity that ensures release, which

makes possible the comprehension of what follows the refrain.

In his formulation of the doctrine of Unity Bullhe Shah is aware that severing its historical links with the sharia in order to free it from its decadent form is no easy task. For this

endeavour not only goes against the Sufi tradition, it also questions the given

form of religion itself. For centuries the Sufis had maintained that Unity must not be proclaimed openly, evidently because it questioned the dualistic framework of the sharia. In other words,

they had for long assumed a compromising stance for the sake of keeping the

formal boundaries of Islamic religion intact. Hallaj was also censored by many Sufis for 'divulging the secret' of Unity. We also noted in the

early pages Junayd's attempt to tone down Bastami's experience of Unity by declaring it a product of an intoxicated state. Though he would often express himself in Unitarian terms, yet he would maintain that one must step down from the state of Unity if one were to serve religion and mankind in a meaningful way.

Bullhe Shah resolves to speak out against this historical compromise. Truth must be expressed, whatever the cost. Thus he often refers to Hallaj, firmly stating that his cry Ana al-Haqq was the speech of God that proclaimed the essential unity of God and man.112

References to Hallaj, once referred to as beloved Mansur, are found in no less than 12 kafis. See ibid., pp. 56, 61, 64,

70-71, 90, 155, 195, 231, 248, 270, 320. It is interesting to note that Hallaj appears as a predominant symbol of the divine truth in the Sindhi Sufi poetry (see Schimmel, 1962). Also noteworthy are certain parallels

between Bullhe Shah's world view and that of Shah Latif (1689- 1752) and Sachal Sarmast (1739-1828). Ibid.

In the following poem two options are compared: whether to say the truth of Unity and face the uproar or keep silent and violate the truth. But since the truth has overwhelmed him, he cannot restrain himself. Also noteworthy is the characterisation of

the given order as dualist which resists the Unitarian world view, since it does not have the eye to appreciate it: The words which came to the lips cannot be turned back. If I utter the truth, there is a blaze. By telling a lie, nothing remains. My heart hesitates cither. Hesitating though my tongue speaks out. The words which came to the lips..... This is a slippery courtyard. Walk carefully, it is dark as well. Enter within and see who is there. Why are people searching outside? The words which came to the lips..... Whoever found the qalandar's secret, found the way towards his essence. He is the dweller of the temple of contentment, where there is neither rise nor fall. The words which came to the lips.....

The condition for right manners must be observed. But the reality of all is known to us. In every being is the manifestation of the Lord, somewhere apparent somewhere concealed. The words which came to the lips..... We have studied spiritual knowledge. But there only one letter is real. All other disputations are superfluous. In vain docs (the world) raise the quarrels. The words which came to the lips..... Bullha, the Beloved is not separated from us. There is nothing other than Him. Only there is no eye to see (Him thus). That is why the soul endures the pangs of separation. The words which came to the lips cannot be turned back.113

Rightly, perhaps, this kafi is reckoned as one of the most representative of Bullhe Shah. Though it has less of the local images, yet it is composed in particularly ‘Bullhian’ style. The very refrain is a Panjabi proverb which hides in it the inner pain implied in saying something which is both unpleasant as well as forbidden. Nevertheless it has to be said since there is an inner necessity behind it which is blind to consequences. The proverb is then followed by lines that look like the tips of the iceberg, remarkable in the economy of words as well as their softness and simplicity.

The first lines suggest that concealment of truth is the norm to which everyone is expected to expected to conform. But in this conformation the poet finds his own negation and so, slowly and haltingly, starts pouring out the truth however scandalous it may be. The expression of truth is also necessitated by the general prevalence of confusion which is indicated by ''slippery

courtyard' and 'darkness'. Elsewhere a different mood is expressed

'One who is possessed of perfect love, dances unrestrained by the tune and beat. In a possible reference to Sarmad, it is stated that whoever dons the

mantle of love is anathematized right from the court. When God takes hold of someone, he proclaims nothing but His unity.114

Bullha also argues that coming out with truth is necessary because people have mixed up matters over the central issue of the God-man relationship.

Here, gal raule loka paaeee, 'the truth has been mixed up by the people, runs the refrain. And what is the truth? The truth is that 'He lives closer than jugular vein,115 but people have raised long disputes'. Thus he asserts that only a statement of truth in clear terms can

sort out the prevailing confusion. At the same time, significantly enough, this task he sees not as part of some divine mission, but as his personal necessity, as means of his salvation and eternal prosperity.116

In a couplet Bullhe Shah again connects these two terms, i.e. gal truth or essence, and raule, noise or confusion. Here he demonstrates that once the essence of the matter, the unity of all being, is clearly understood, the confusion created by multiple forms of different creeds would come to end:

Once the truth is comprehended, then what is Ram, Rahim and Maula. 117

This dohra provides also ample illustration of Bullhe Shah's mastery over language as well as the clarity of his thought. The union of these two features enables him to express intricate ideas in minimum of simple words of everyday experience.

For Bullha the affirmation of truth on part of the individual is the affirmation of his individuality, of his inner being, by virtue of which he becomes distinct from the other, from everything that is other than God. Concealment of the truth, on the other hand, is becoming ‘the other’ a compromise that costs him his uniqueness, so that he is submerged in a mass of whole that enjoys only a formal identity and which refuses the autonomy of its constituents or parts.

Bullhe Shah and the end of Sufi tradition Indeed the individual holds a central place in the Unitarian world of Bullhe Shah. At the beginning of this work we

noted that Iqbal, along with some other Western scholars, see in Sufism, and more especially in the doctrine of Unity, negation of the individual and his

individuality. However, in our subsequent discussion we argued that this view of the negation of the individual was based on erroneous conception of the doctrine of Unity. We saw that among the two schools that developed immediately after the death of the Prophet, it was the orthodox one which denied the individual any role in life and religion. Ali and his associates, and then the early Imams, on the other hand, had affirmed the continuing role of the individual as the one who gives life to the scripture through his knowledge of God. This conception, embodied in the doctrine of walya, subsequently became the hallmark of Sufism, which expressed itself in the supreme authority of the Sufi master as the embodiment of divinity.

Bastami's utterance subhani ma sha’ani and more especially Hallaj's An al- Haqq illustrated the idea, later fully developed by Ibn Arabi, that it is the individual in whom God reveals Himself on the earth so that he becomes His testimony, the individual par excellence.

Bullhe Shah's conception of individuality is deeply embedded in this notion of spirituality. He makes it clear that affirmation of the truth or proclamation of Unity is not an abstract activity or a mental phenomenon, as for instance Sirhindi thought. It is not getting oneself lost in the world of fantasy whereby he becomes unconscious of the world. On the contrary, it involves conscious negation of the given reality insofar as it exists other than God. One participates in this reality with the "belief that his self is parallel to God. Confined within this dualistic framework, he fetters himself to the realm of finitude. Unity, that opens to him the realm of infinity, of consciousness of God, is reaching to nothingness,' literally no-thingness whereby no attribute in the material world encompasses him, for he reflects divine consciousness which can neither be compared nor comprehended through anything or attribute of the material world.

Compare these verses of Bullhe Shah in which we encounter the expression of the ideal consciousness, or what may be termed as qalandar-consciousness, the consciousness beyond its shell or form: I am unfettered, I am unfettered, I am neither sick, nor a physician. I am neither a believer nor an infidel. I am neither of Sayyid caste nor master of anyone. I roam freely in the fourteen realms, nowhere am I bound.

I am a visitor of the tavern, I know neither grace nor sin.

You ask who is Bullhe Shah! I am unborn, I am nothing.118

This is the state of immortality in which physical death becomes non-event in the eternal life of the individual:

Bullhe Shah we will never die, it is someone else who has gone to the grave.119

He realizes that public recognition as a holy man is the lost resort of the self to maintain its duality from God.

Thus in a deep anguish proclaims: Let's go Bullha, let's go to the place where there are all blind. Where no one could see our caste (zaat), where no one could revere us.120

In the second line the word zaat has been rendered as caste, referring Bullha's coming from a Sayyid family, and the wide reverence that long Sayyids have

enjoyed in the Muslim world. However, the presence the word annhe, blind, in the first line also suggests that perhaps he visualizing a formless, spiritual world, i.e., where one is known by essence and not by his form, or his inherited attributes. Elsewhere, however, he clearly mentions his weariness of the reverence given to him for being a Sayyid. His devotion and service to his master, Shah Inayat, who was an Arain, a lower caste, was probably detested by his relations. He denounces them in no uncertain terms, saying, 'Anyone who calls us Sayyid, he would indeed be punished in hell. But anyone who calls us an Arain he would secure the joy of paradise for himself.’ 121

In his conception of negation of the given reality as the prelude to affirmation of Unity, Bullha must have been greatly inspired by Sarmad whom, as noted above, he accorded a high place in the long line of divine lovers. Sarmad understood his whole life as engaged in negation of – idols, of false gods. So he would not recite the whole ‘shahda’, restraining himself after la ilha, there is no god, for he found it impossible to affirm the God's unity as long as the process of negation of the false gods not complete.122 In the following

poem the image of the thief, chor, the perception of Unity is intriguing. As it escapes from his cloak but Bukkal, creates tumult in the world, for it eliminates the boundaries of formal religion, asking for a supra-religious identity of the individual. The voice, may be noted, is that of a woman:

In my cloak there is a thief, in my cloak there is a thief. To whom should I proclaim that there is a thief in my cloak. Stealthily it escaped and there was an uproar in the world. In my cloak there is a thief. The Muslims are frightened of cremation while the Hindus fear the grave. Both are dying in this wrangle, this is the ailment of the both. In my cloak mere is a thief. Somewhere Ram Das and somewhere Fateh Muhammad, this is the age-old confrontation. Their quarrel has come to an end, for someone else has emerged anew. In my cloak there is a thief.123

There is another well-known kafi of Bullhe Shah in which he illustrates his conception of individuality. It recalls Rumi's poem

'what should I do O Muslims’, for I do not know myself. I am neither a Christian, nor a Jew nor a Fire-worshipper, and nor a Muslim'.124

The poem begins with the question as to who I am and gradually unfolds that self-knowledge is self- negation. As the poem proceeds it becomes clear that the way to All is paved by countless negations, of all the predicates that define given personality.

In other words, man in his highest consciousness is beyond all determinations. And of all the creation it is only he who can deny every determination and yet be there.

He can say I am neither this, nor that, neither this nor that, but still ‘I’ is there, for after being purified by all the contaminations, what remains is God's ‘I’ personified in the individual. Thus, while Bullha follows in the footsteps of Rumi in most part, at the end he affirms the place of man in spirituality more forcefully, emphasizing that the supreme dwelling place of God is man.

At the same time, however, in the last line, he also affirms the existence of the Beloved, implying probably that by negating all the determinations he had not become God (incarnate), for God is All. Bullah what do I know who am I? I am the beginning and the end, I do not recognise any other; no one else is wise than me; Bullha who is the beloved standing there? Bullha what do I know who am I? 125

We have seen that Hallaj's advocacy of alteration in the fundamental tenets of the sharia was not accepted by mainstream Sufism, and thus the concept of the finality of the Law, in practice if not in theory, was sustained. In other words, Sufism, had visualized spirituality within perimeters of Islamic religion which were maintained through the sharia.

Since the Qalandars rejected the role of the sharia in spirituality, they were not regarded as part of mainstream Sufism. For it was rightly argued that Sufism had developed within the pale of Islam and if this relationship that of Sufism and the sharia, was severed it would be the end of Sufism itself.

In Bullhe Shah, we discern signs, the earlier manifestations of which we have already seen in Shah Husain and Sultan Bahu, of his readiness in take the great leap and reject the absolute status of the sharia, thus going for the end of Sufism itself.

Bullhe Shah, we must remember, appeared at the twilight of Islamic civilization, when its form, represented by sharia, had lost its relevance for the new age that was dawning in the West. Bullhe Shah might not be aware of the new age, but what he is conscious of is that Sufism must free itself from the framework of its immutable, decadent form, if it has to preserve what it stands for.

His argument also carries weight when we see that if Sufism was more to be in the hands of the Ulemas than the Sufis, as it seemed in India after Sirhindi, then the Sufis must leave it in order to preserve the autonomy of their position, thus developing a spirituality beyond the perimeters of religion. In a sense the way had been shown early by Kabir and the Sants who had advocated the abandonment of given religion for development of true spirituality. Thus, by persistently drawing inherent gulf between the sharia and spirituality, Bullha seems to assert the outdated nature of the sharia, and argue that Sufism which sought its recognition through it had also lived its age.

The seekers or lovers of God therefore, must tread a path that is free from the taints of formal religion so that the true universal character of spirituality be unveiled. We may conclude this chapter with the following verses of Bullhe Shah which reveal an increasing awareness of the oppressive character of the existing religious form. Opposition to it, according to him, is the only way that leads to transcendence: Drink wine and eat roasted meat, O Bullha, and burn underneath the fire of (your) bones. Be a thief and destroy the house of God; [thus] trick that trickster of the tricksters.126

Eat what is unlawful and be thankful O Bullah; repent and break yourself from (the thought ol) every (divine) reward. Get away from the mosque and seek solitude (only) that will relieve your soul from the torments.127 I became one with my love throwing away my modesty and honour. In the midst of the garden I laid the bed and slept openly in his embrace.128 To hell with the prayers, out in the mud the fasts and darkened the kalima Bullhe Shah the beloved is found inside, humanity is lost in ignorance.129

Needless to say, his ultimate purpose in affirming the relativity of the form is to unveil the eternal, the inner dimension of the Quran. The following kafi may provide the suitable concluding note: Now you tell me (whichever way you turn) there is the face of God,130 O friend; do not turn my veil, conceal my shortcomings, O friend. Now you tell me (whichever way you turn) there is the face of God, O friend; I am an ignorant one, what do I know of how to love you; I am not versed in the manners of loving, O friend. Now you tell me (whichever way you turn) there is the face of God, O friend; the people go to Mecca for pilgrimage; I turn to you for my pilgrimage O friend. Now you tell me (whichever way you turn) there is the face of God O friend; the stream is deep and the boat is old, how am I going to meet you O friend. Now you tell me (whichever way you turn) there is the face of God-consciousness friend; Bullha, I beheld the beloved revealed; take off the veil from your O friend.131

To sum up, we have seen earlier that Islam and Sufism had helped Hindu spirituality to come out of its decadent form. Its most powerful expression came from Kabir. Not long after Sufism and Islam grew weary of their supposedly immutable and absolute form. Bullhe Shah knew it and did not hesitate to say it. Islamic spirituality must no longer be kept under its age-old

encasement, he argued, if it had to survive as the universal vision of Reality.

But one may ask: what would remain of Sufism and Islam if they were to lose their form, their very identity and name? But then what is an identity but self. The knowledge of the self is tantamount to its dissolution,

or as Abu Sa'id put it, annihilation of the self is assumption of all-embracing Self. The purpose of the form is to protect its kernel. But when the kernel is established, as is evident from the vast body of 'revelation' or spiritual experience accumulated through innumerable Sufis' communion with God, the form loses its relevance Instead of being its face, it becomes its mask. When the veil (form) becomes the mask, it is the moment of alarm. For before long the mask would turn into a strait-jacket and stifle the Spirit. We must not let it be so, or the legacy of a great civilization will be lost, for good, leaving us a lot poorer than we actually are.