“Alauddin two classes, Amirs or ulemas. The Sultan

“Alauddin held that the government was one thing and law another and so long as what he ordered seemed to him good he did not stop to enquire whether it was according to law.”

He had a firm opinion that the king had no kinship and that all the inhabitants of the country must be either his servants or his sub­jects. Hence it was their pious duty to obey orders of the Sultan without any ‘ifs’ and ‘buts.

Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch
100% plagiarism free
Sources and citations are provided

Get essay help

Alauddin had decided not to be influenced by any person, or party in finalizing the policy of the Sultanate. Thirteenth century Sultans of Delhi were influenced mostly by two classes, Amirs or ulemas. The Sultan did not intend that the Amirs should grow powerful and influence the policies of the Sultan.

He wanted to estab­lish his own control over them and desired to appoint and suspend them according to his own sweet will. He terrified them to a great extent. None of his courtiers dared advise him or pray to him for any concession. Only Ala-ul-Mulk, his bosom friend and Kotwal of Delhi had the right to advise the Sultan.

He did not tolerate the interference of the orthodox Muslims and Ulemas in administration and politics. Dr. Ishwari Prasad re­marks,

“He was too wise to play into the hands of the clericalists”.

Prior to him the Sultans were guided by the religious people but he was against them. He regarded polity and government as two different things.

Royal comrfiands belong to the king and the legal decrees rest upon the judgement of Qazis and Muftis. Thus he separated both religion and politics. His talks with Qazi Mughisuddin clarify his attitude towards State policy. Barani quotes him: “To prevent rebellion in which thousands perish, I issue such orders as I conceive to be for the good of the State, and the benefit of the people. Men are heedless, disrespectful and disobey my commands; I am then compelled to be severe to bring them into obedience. I do not know whether this is lawful or unlawful, whatever I think to be for the good of the State or suitable for the emergency that I decree.”

No doubt he continued to style himself as Yamin-ul Khilafat Nasiri Amir-ul-Momnin, but he never sought recognition from the Khalifa for his kingship nor did he consider it necessary to include the name of Khalifa in State affairs, but he wanted to keep the Khilafat alive in theory, if not in practice.

Dr. A. L. Srivastava re­marks, “Thus to Alauddin goes the credit of being the first Turkish Sultan of Delhi to bring the church under the control of the State and to usher in factors that might make the State secular in theory.”

Although he was a true Muslim, he did not care to seek the advice of orthodox Muslims. However, he took advantage of the fanaticism of the Muslims against the Hindus. He never acted against the canons of Islam.

His anti-Hindu policy is also a proof that he never wanted to establish a secular State Even then his theory of kingship was quite unique and its significance canpot be underesti­mated. Dr. K. S Lai remarks, “In a word, like Louis XIV of France, Alauddin regarded himself to be all in all in the State.”