Abstrict

The modern state that developed in the Indian subcontinent after the arrival of colonial power in the region had profound effects on the internal religious-spiritual matters of Sufi shrines. The Chisht? Sufi shrine of B?b? Far?d, in Pakpattan, also heavily affected by the emergent state’s policies in all respects. The state’s intrusion into the ritualistic matters of the shrine has gradually reduced the traditional custodian of the shrine to a mere ceremonial head of the institution. The process of politicization of Sufi rituals started during the British Raj; the crucial interference in the ceremonies of the shrine came after the take-over of the management and the administration of the shrine of B?b? Far?d by the West Pakistan Auq?f authorities during the early 1960s. This study is intended to explore the emergence and development of the centuries-old ritualistic patterns of the shrine, the modern state’s contrivances that affected them, and the resultant effects of the said evolution on the local religious authority of the traditional office bearers of the shrine.

Keywords

Auq?f Department, Bahisht? Darv?za, Chisht? Sufism, dast?r-band?, modern state, Pakpattan, Sufi rituals, shrine of B?b? Far?d, sajj?da-nish?n, langar-kh?na

Introduction

The accommodating approach of early Chisht? Sufi masters in the Indian subcontinent brought them into direct contact with local people, leading to a solid personal relationship with the local population. Followers of the other Indian religions gradually became part of the process, especially around several kh?nq?hs (convents or Sufi lodges) established by various Sufis and later their shrines. “For it was through its rituals that a shrine made Islam accessible to non lettered masses, providing them with vivid and concrete manifestations of the divine order, and integrating them into its ritualized drama both as participants and as sponsors”. (Eaton, 1984)

The presence of the shrine of a renowned 13th century Chisht? Sufi saint, Shaikh Far?d al-D?n Mas ??d Ganj-i Shakar (d. 1265) in the city of Pakpattan has had varying effects on the political, economic, social, educational, cultural, and religious development of the city. An objective study of the shrine of Shaikh Far?d reveals a close relationship between the history of the area and that of the shrine. Besides, the cultural transformation of the area has been, and remains, influenced by the status and the role played by the shrine. (Muhammad Mubeen, 2015)

Due to his scholastic religious expertise as well as his recognition as a spiritual master, Shaikh Far?d (popularly known as B?b? Far?d) proved to be the source of the local religious authority of the institution he established, the jam??at-kh?na Far?diyya in Aj?dhan (present Pakpattan). Different rituals and ceremonies were established at the institution during B?b? Far?d’s times, like singing qavv?l? (spiritual and devotional singing of Sufi poetry) and running of the langar-kh?na (charity kitchen). However, daily functioning of the kh?nq?h of B?b? Far?d, during the lifetime of B?b? Far?d, was more like of an educational institution where the jam??t-kh?na (space for the spiritual disciples of a Chisht? saint where they are provided with spiritual, religious, and moral education) was the most important part of the institution. (Nizami, 1955)

After the demise of B?b? Far?d in 1265, a different type of functioning developed in the shrine whose focal point was to venerate the buried saint and ?iy?rat (regular pilgrimage at the tomb) of B?b? Far?d became a regular practice in the later period. (Markovits, 2004) From his demise, his legacy continues in Pakpattan, mainly represented by his lineal descendants and the vast shrine complex based on his tomb, a mosque, a charity kitchen, and several related buildings. Different hagiographical sources like Am?r Khusrau’s R??at al-Mu?ibb?n (“pleasure of the Lovers [of God]”) and ?Al? A?ghar Chisht?’s Jav?hir-i-Far?d? (gems of Far?d) record how the major rituals have been instituted in the early days of the shrine career. (Al? A?ghar Chisht?, 1884)(Am?r Khusrau, n.d.) The major ceremonies that gradually became part of the daily, weekly, and annual routine of the shrine include the regular educational ventures of the jam??t-kh?na, regular running of the langar-kh?na, daily evening singing of qavv?li, distribution of Shakar (raw sugar), and lightening of d?y?s (oil-lamps) by the visiting pilgrims, weekly ceremonies of Thursdays and Fridays’ sam?? (qavv?l? singing and dham?l- an ecstatic dance with strong drumming), the annual ?urs festival in the month of Mu?arram, the annual opening of the Bahisht? Darv?za (lit. “Door to Paradise”), and the dast?r-band? (tying of a turban) – a  ceremony denoting a formal placement of a lineal descendant of the saint in the office of the sajj?da-nish?n (custodian of the office). From the days of the establishment of the shrine onward, annual ?urs of the saint and its different ceremonies like the opening of shrine’s Bahisht? Darv?za and the distribution of Shakar (sugar) enhanced the link between the shrine and the local population, boosting the socio-religious authority of the shrine of B?b? Far?d in the later centuries. (Hasht Bahisht: Majm??a-i- Malf?z?t Khw?jg?n-i Chisht (Urdu Tr.), 1996) And “Over centuries, the shrine of B?b? Far?d got precedence over jam??at kh?na, which became less significant as an institution” (Anjum, 2009)

The socio-religious prestige of the shrine and its successive custodians paved the way for the shrine’s local political and economic authority in the region during the medieval period. Resultantly, Pakpattan remained, for centuries, under the politico-administrative authority of the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d that ultimately resulted in his control over the economic resources of the region. Therefore, the shrine of B?b? Far?d was enjoying a well-defined local authority in Pakpattan and its environs that reflected the local shrine culture, manifested through the prestigious status of its sajj?da-nish?n - a semi-independent ruler of Pakpattan when the British East India Company (BEIC) annexed Punjab in 1849. (Muhammad Mubeen, 2015)

The shrine’s local authority dynamics took a new turn with the change of central political authority in mid-19th century India. The establishment of the modern state, by its wide-ranging, centralized, and hierarchical executive, political, and economic arrangements, primarily aimed at setting an operational administration in the region and utilizing as much as possible the local resources, had far-reaching consequences for the local shrine culture. In a way, a process of redefining the local authority of the shrine took place through official institutions like the local executive, the Court of Wards, judicial courts, and the law itself. In Pakpattan shrine, the process of redefinition by the state resulted in the politicization of three major rituals at large; the dast?r-band?, the control of the annual ?urs festival, and the annual opening of the Bahisht? Darv?za. The following paragraphs will highlight the evolution of the process.

The Modern State and the Politicization of the Major Chisht? Sufi Rituals Associated with the Shrine of B?b? Far?d

With the advent of the modern state in the mid-19th century, the state took over the role of the most powerful socio-political actor in the region; the shrine of B?b? Far?d could not escape the socio-political developments going around even the internal religious-spiritual matters of the shrine could not escape from the modern state’s encroachment. Gradually the modern state penetrated the management of the shrine’s economic resources. This phenomenon ultimately culminated in the take-over of the shrine management and its financial resources by the post-colonial state of Pakistan in the early 1960s. All the aspects of the local authority of the shrine of B?b? Far?d, including the socio-religious authority, were affected by the modern state, which resulted in the evolution of the ‘local shrine culture’.

During the colonial period, the rituals did not change significantly, and the state only intervened to regularize the annual ?urs festival. During the pre-colonial times, the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d used to manage the shrine and regularize its affairs during the annual ?urs. The sajj?da-nish?n had his staff deal with every matter. During the colonial period, the state machinery was partially involved in matters of special importance. The correspondence of 1871, related to an incident during the annual ?urs, clearly suggests that the local officials, namely a ta???ld?r (tehsil revenue officer) and a sub-inspector, were involved in the administrative arrangements during the festival. However, they were working to help the regular staff of the sajj?da-nish?n. During the shrine management under the ‘Court of Wards’ in the 1930s and 1940s, the matters were controlled by the Deputy Commissioner of Sahiwal, who was assigned as the Court of Ward for the minor sajj?da-nish?n.

After the Partition, until the take-over of the shrine of B?b? Far?d by the West Pakistan Auq?f Department in January 1961, the incumbent sajj?da-nish?n himself remained in the helm of affairs for the arrangements. (Notification No. 3(4)-Auq?f/60, Dated January 17, 1961, n.d.) However, the main interference by the state in the ceremonies of the shrine came in the late 1960s, a few years after the take-over of the management of the shrine of B?b? Far?d by the state authorities.

In the first place, the custodian family complains that the Auq?f has caused many destructions. For example, as is claimed by the family of the sajj?da-nish?n, a large number of the tabarruk?t (relics) of the shrine had been sold out or destroyed by the Auq?f officials. At the time of the take-over by the Auq?f Department, they were in abundance, but the unconcerned officials of the Auq?f Department have destroyed this legacy. Similarly, the custodian family members claim that the Auq?f managers have even sold the floor marble tiles of the interior of the tomb and the big gha?y?l (clock tower) of the shrine, which was an invisible sign of the shrine for the locale up to a considerable distance around the city of Pakpattan. Thirdly, the Auq?f control over the food distribution of the langar, over the distribution of the cut-pieces of the ch?dars of B?b? Far?d’s grave, and its control over the shrine cashboxes, despite the presence of the living representative of B?b? Far?d, has disturbed the shrine following in one way or the other. In the post-take-over period, the politicization of some main rituals has disturbed the traditional ritualistic patterns of the shrine, which are discussed below.

The Dast?r-Band? (Turban tying)

The dast?r-band? (tying of a turban) symbolizes the succession of the commonly revered saint and the continuation of the moral authority of the shrine. The dast?r-band? ceremony meant to place the lineal descendant formally in the office of the sajj?da-nish?n is a key ceremony of the institution B?b? Far?d established at Aj?dhan. Having a turban tied at the shrine as dast?r-band? means inheriting B?b? Far?d’s spiritual authority, which represents the continuation of his baraka (blessing conferred by God upon humankind and transmitted through saints) through a living representative from his blood lineage. Eaton remarks, “this act decisively served ritually to link the new successor with B?b? Far?d himself and rested in the popular belief that B?b? Far?d had used his own turban as a symbol of spiritual authority.” He continues, “Indeed, it is in the turban’s rich symbolic repertoire that we see its capacity to express and sustain values so central to the shrine. Accordingly, in different contexts, the turban could even express values that might otherwise appear mutually antagonistic, i.e., the hierarchy of religious status and commonality of cultural inheritance” and “… the turban, used in the proper ritual context, was uniquely empowered to endow the wearer with B?b? Far?d s own spiritual authority.” (Eaton, 1982)

According to the analysis of Richard Eaton, in the history of Pakpattan, this ceremony played a key role in establishing the local authority of the shrine of B?b? Far?d and its custodian in the region. In his opinion, “…the shrine B?b? Far?d assimilated people religiously as well as politically and socially, the tying of the turban (dastar bandi) possessed a great symbolic repertoire; it defined relations of kinship between the shrine and the subordinate clans, it symbolically conferred legitimacy on actual rulers in Delhi, and it conferred spiritual discipleship at the shrine itself.” (Eaton, 1984)

In the shrine’s tradition, the ceremony was always performed by a Chisht? master or by a sajj?da-nish?n of some prominent Chisht? shrine, as showed in the table here below.




Table 1. The dast?r-band? of different sajj?da-nish?ns carried out by Chisht? Personages (rest of the sajj?da-nish?ns put the dast?r (turban) themselves on their head)

S. No		The Sajj?da-Nish?n	Dast?r-band? carried out by
1st	Badr al-D?n Sulaim?n (d. 1281)		Shaikh Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy? (d. 1325)
2nd	?Al?? al-D?n Mauj Dary? (d. 1334)		Shaikh Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy?
3rd	Mu ?iz al-D?n (d. 1348, performed in 1323, before his father’s death)		Shaikh Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy?
4th	Mu ?a??am Af?al al-D?n Fu?ail (d. 1355)		Shaikh Khw?ja Na??r al-D?n Chir?gh of Delhi (d. 1356)
5th	Mu?ammad Munavvar (d. 1403)		Shaikh Khw?ja Na??r al-D?n Chir?gh of Delhi
12th	Ibr?h?m (Far?d ??n?) (d. 1552)		Shaikh Khw?ja ?asan (Chisht? Niz?m? master)
13th	T?j al-D?n Ma?m?d (d. 1610)		Shaikh Ab? Sa?id Gangoh? (Chisht? ??br? master) (d. 1630)
21st	Glulam Ras?l (d. 1809)		Mu?ammad ?ay?t (sajj?da-nish?n M?r?? Sayyid Bhekh)
22nd	Mu?ammad Y?r (d. 1828)		Mu?ammad ?ay?t (sajj?da-nish?n M?r?? Sayyid Bhekh)
25th	Said Mu?ammad (d. 1934)		Khw?ja P?r Mu?ammad ?asan Sh?h Far?d? (Chisht? master)

Source: Asr?r-i-?Itrat-i-Far?d? (Private lives of Far?d’s descendants) (Urdu tr.) (1891): 273-95.

 

However, the only dast?r-band? ceremony for the formal succession to the office of the 27th sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d, in the post-take-over period, that took place in 1986 was performed by the Governor of Punjab, instead of any Chisht? master.

The Annual Opening of the Bahisht? Darv?za

The presence of the Bahisht? Darv?za in the shrine of B?b? Far?d is one of the most important privileges of the town of Pakpattan since many centuries. Eaton, while analyzing the importance of the annual ?urs of the shrine of B?b? Far?d during the colonial and pre-colonial period, writes: “In the Bihishti mel? the theme of salvation through loving devotion was made far more explicit than in most other Indo-Muslim shrines since all participants literally acted it out,” and “… the Bihishti ceremony served ritually to act out and confirm the sense of spiritual hierarchy that pervades the whole ethos of the shrine.” (Eaton, 1982) Therefore, for centuries, the ceremony of crossing the Bahisht? Darv?za during the annual ?urs at the shrine of B?b? Far?d remained the source of spiritual solace for the pilgrims.

The hagiographical sources like Ta?q?q?t-i Chisht? (1867) and Asr?r-i-?Itrat-i-Far?d? (1891) as well as the official correspondence carried out in 1871, referred above, which all describe the ?urs ceremonies at the shrine of B?b? Far?d, suggest that in the shrine’s history, the Bahisht? Darv?za was previously not open for more than two nights during the ?urs, on the 6th and the 7th of the first month of the Islamic calendar, Mu?arram. They also state that the incumbent sajj?da-nish?n always carried out the opening ceremony.

In the post-take-over period, symbolically the most important change that shattered not only the religious authority but also the social prestige of the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d: he was deprived of his privilege of being the only person qualified to open the revered Bahisht? Darv?za during the annual ?urs. Moreover, since 1968-69, the Bahisht? Darv?za has been opened for three more nights by state authorities. Let us see how and why this change occurred.

In 1968, the annual ?urs started on March 25. Three weeks before the commencement, the Chief Administrator Auq?f (CAA) issued an order to keep open the Bahisht? Darv?za for seven nights from 1st of Mu?arram to the 7th of Mu?arram during the annual ?urs, from 7 pm to 7 am. (Letter Dated March 2, 1968, by the Administrator Auq?f, Lahore, n.d.)

On the March 25, the order was challenged by P?r Mu?ammad ??rif Chisht?, a close relative of the then sajj?da-nish?n, under article 98 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in the High Court of West Pakistan Lahore. In the petition, it was claimed, with reference to the Jav?hir-i Far?d? (gems of Far?d) (1623), that the ritual of the opening of the Bahisht? Darv?za was established by Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy? who envisioned the Prophet of Islam at the spot. Niz?m al- D?n Auliy? performed the ritual, which has been repeated ever since. Therefore, the ritual should not be left with the personal will of the CAA, who, according to the Waqf Ordinance of 1959, was authorized only to take over the management and the property of the shrine and was not authorized to issue any order regarding the matters connected with the ceremonies at the shrine. The petitioners argued that the CAA had no authority to alter the wishes of the dedicator, which through continuous usage had become a binding custom regulating the ceremonies at the shrine. (Writ Petition No. 437 of 1968, dated March 25, 1968, in the High Court of West Pakistan., n.d.) At the 1968 ?urs, the ordered pattern was followed that changed, according to the claimants, the entire complexion of the ?urs and disturbed the settled traditions laid down by Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy? and followed since then. Therefore, it caused resentment in the following.

In his response, the CAA blamed the sajj?da-nish?n for misusing the discretionary authority of opening of the Bahisht? Darv?za. The CAA accused the sajj?da-nish?n of getting financial benefits by granting the right of passing through the door. The person who could pay more nazr?na (offerings) to the sajj?da-nish?n could have easy and repeated access to the door. He furthered that such harassment and the monetary extortion in the shrine for the sake of getting entry to the Bahisht? Darv?za caused disappointment in the pilgrims. He also accused the sajj?da-nish?n of different patronizing malpractices in the shrine premises. The CAA denied any type of public resentment after the order was issued and argued that the decision was taken for the benefit of the pilgrims. He contended that the door was built long after the demise of B?b? Far?d, and the ceremony attached of passing through it was a very recent development. He further argued no document existed which could show any religious ordinance either by B?b? Far?d himself or by Khw?ja Niz?m al- D?n Auliy? to keep the door open only for two nights. He further pushed that if passing through the gate was a venerated norm, it should be opened for additional nights to let more pilgrims pass through it. To prevent the crowd, enormously growing over the years, from causing such problems as stampede (due to the small size of the door) or from threatening law and order in the town during the annual fair, he ordered to open the door for seven nights. He endorsed his argument by telling the High Court that he even let the door open for ten nights during the annual fair of 1969 to ease the flow of pilgrims, which numbered an estimated three lakh. (Respondent answer to the petition of 1968 dated April 15, 1969, n.d.) 

However, the Auq?f record shows that the case remained pending for the next few years. The Bahisht? Darv?za was opened for five nights in the years 1970 and onward, as CAA undertook to open the Bahisht? Darv?za on the 5th of Mu?arram and to continue to open till the 9th of Mu?arram. (Report by the Chief Administrator Auqaf, 1995)

In July 1990, the CAA, Punjab, issued a Notification, in which it was notified that for the first two nights (5th and 6th Mu?arram), the sajj?da-nish?n would open the Bahisht? Darv?za. The rest of the nights, this privilege would go over to different state officials: for the third night (7th Mu?arram), to the Minister Auq?f/ Secretary and CAA, Punjab, for the fourth night (8th Mu?arram), to the Divisional/District Administration, and for the fifth night (9th Mu?arram), to the Zonal Administrator Auq?f (ZAA) Multan, or to their respective representative. (Order No. SOP-2 5(17)1 Dated July 07, 1990, by the Chief Administrator Auqaf, Lahore, n.d.) This schedule remained applicable for seventeen consecutive years until reshuffled in January 2008, when a tussle was going on between the local administrators for the fourth-day opening ceremony because the Local Government under the ?ila? N?zim (District administrator) was also functioning at the district level.

On January 11, 2008, the CAA, Punjab, issued a new Notification, in which it was notified that for the first two nights (5th and 6th Mu?arram), the sajj?da-nish?n would open the Bahisht? Darv?za. The rest of the nights, this honor would over to different state authorities: for the third night (7th Mu?arram), to the CAA/ Director Religious Affairs Auq?f, Punjab Lahore, for the fourth night (8th Mu?arram), to the District Coordination Officer (DCO) Pakpattan, and for the fifth night (9th of Mu?arram), to the ZAA Pakpattan, or their respective representative. (Order No. SOP 5(17)1, Dated January 11, 2008, by the Chief Administrator Auqaf, Lahore, n.d.) However, the Local Government was still ignored in the Notification. On the request of the ?ila? N?zim, four days later, on 15th, a new notification was issued with backdating (of January 11) and with the signatures of January 15, in which it was notified that for the first two nights (5th and 6th Mu?arram), the sajj?da-nish?n would open the Bahisht? Darv?za. The rest of the nights, this privilege would go to a different state and local authorities: for the third night (7th Mu?arram), to the CAA/ Director Religious Affairs Auq?f, Punjab Lahore, for the fourth night (8th Mu?arram), to the ?ila? N?zim Pakpattan instead of the DCO, and for the fifth night (9th Mu?arram), to the DCO Pakpattan instead of the ZAA Pakpattan, or their respective representative.

A week later, the ZAA Pakpattan contested this order in his letter to the CAA. He argued that the newly issued schedule could attract other local official authorities like police, judiciary, or Tehsil administration to fight for the opportunity of opening the Bahisht? Darv?za. Therefore, he demanded that the schedule of 1990 be reinstated and the ZAA and the Manager of the shrine of B?b? Far?d, who administer the shrine the whole year, have the privileged opportunity mutually. (Letter No. ZAP/A-II/Auqaf 2008/3642, Dated January 21, 2008, from the Zonal Administrator Auq?f, Pakpattan Zone to Chief Administrator Auq?f Punjab, Lahore, n.d.) Within a week after this letter, a new Order was issued, in which it was notified that for the first two nights (5th and 6th Mu?arram), the sajj?da-nish?n would open the Bahisht? Darv?za. The rest of the nights, different state authorities would open the door: for the third night (7th Mu?arram), the Secretary/CAA Punjab/ Director Religious Affairs Auq?f Punjab Lahore, for the fourth night (8th Mu?arram), the Divisional/District Administration, and for the fifth night (9th of Mu?arram), the ZAA Pakpattan, or their respective representative, were reinstated to open the Bahisht? Darv?za. (Order No. SOP 5(17)1, Dated April 30, 2008, Office of the Chief Administrator Auq?f Punjab, Lahore, n.d.) This pattern is still followed currently.

The Annual ?Urs

The annual fairs held at the Sufi shrines in Punjab, generally on the death anniversaries of the buried saints, are popularly termed as ?urs – literally final ‘marriage’ with God. Various rituals, customs, and ceremonies observed on these auspicious occasions are the media to demonstrate faith, devotion, and deep and can be looked upon as ways of seeking and receiving the heavenly blessings. The more exalted and the accomplished the saints are, and the deeper and the more unflinching faith in them, the vaster and the more lasting divine responses will be hoped to make the life here and hereafter blissful and comfortable – the fulfilment of the Divine purpose of Creation.

The ?urs of B?b? Far?d is observed every year for centuries; it has developed its character and culture. It acts as a meeting place for his followers from diverse origins who attend the shrine to pay homage to the saint. The ritual of circumambulation performed around the tomb of B?b? Far?d during the annual ?urs demonstrates the unity of the followers of B?b? Far?d, being similar to the circumambulation performed by ?ajj pilgrims around the Ka?ba, meant to affirm the unity of the believers in the worship of the One God.

With the take-over of the shrine management in 1961, the whole management of the shrine went under the control of the Auq?f Department, which collaborated with other local administrative departments to deal with the special arrangements of the annual festival inside and outside the shrine premises. The Auq?f Department gave the sajj?da-nish?n a certain annual amount for the performance of rituals at the shrine during the annual ‘urs time. According to the official record of the Zonal Administrator Auqaf, Pakpattan, in 1998, the Department authorities accepted sajj?da-nish?n’s long-lasting demand of stipend for the upkeep of his family. As he was not satisfied with the amount, and to get his stipend increased, the incumbent sajj?da-nish?n resorted to a dangerous means to pressure by refusing to open the Bahisht? Darv?za despite repeated requests from the administration, during the annual ‘urs in March 2001. The result was a stampede at the shrine on the first night of the opening of Bahisht? Darv?za, which caused the death of dozens of devotees in the shrine premises. (Rozehnal, 2006) After the incident, the annual stipend for the sajj?da-nish?n has been gradually increasing.

At present, during the annual ?urs, the Auq?f authorities, in collaboration with the local administration, carry out extensive arrangements. The Auq?f authorities provide adequate facilities to the local administration to establish a control set-up in the shrine premises. Before the commencement of the ?urs, several meetings are held to finalize the arrangements in which responsibilities and costs are appropriately allocated to the concerned departments. The Deputy Commissioner and the Senior Superintendent Police set their camps in the shrine complex and collaborated to control the situation. Security cameras and walk-through gates are installed at different points to ensure security measures. Many police personnel under senior police officers are appointed inside the shrine premises to control day and night routines. A Police Guard (comprising hundreds of police officers) from the adjoining districts is brought to Pakpattan town under provincial government orders to help regularize affairs. (Office File “?Urs ?a?rat B?b? Far?d Al-D?in Mas??d Ganj-i Shakar – 2008-09”, District Cordination Officer, Pakpattan, n.d.)

The Shrine, The Rituals, The Local Shrine Culture, and the Impact of the Politicization of Sufi Rituals in Pakpattan

B?b? Far?d once told a visitor who had presented a pair of scissors to him: “Do not give me scissors, give me a needle. I sew. I do not cut.” (Nizami, 1955) This is what his shrine does in many ways. For centuries, the spirit of the rituals established at the shrine of B?b? Far?d and the annual ?urs is about bringing people together.

In the Punjabi Muslim society, Sufi shrines are traditionally considered analogues of Heaven. Gellener describes Sufi saint’s baraka as a “socially legitimated Charisma” in the way it is dealt with by the respective characters involved. (Gellner, 1969) The baraka of a saint is a believed transcendent spiritual entity that satisfies its recipients’ desires helps them control their lower soul  (nafs) and gives them peace and tranquillity. (Ewing, 1983) The baraka is commonly considered imbued within material objects or human beings in the form of tabarruk. For the followers of the Sufi discourse, actions such as taking petals from the graves as blessed stuff, done with a pure heart, make them the recipients of the blessings or baraka of the saint. The pilgrims usually bring some offerings (nazr?na) which may serve as a vehicle for visitors to partake of the saint’s baraka.

The popular belief of the intermediary status of a Sufi saint and his shrine in the Punjabi Muslim society explains Sufi shrines’ importance and spheres of influence. Ballard explains beautifully the procedure through which the seekers access shrines and put their ultimate questions and demands in front of the Almighty. In the first place, they offer prayers at the shrine to seek the help of the deceased saint as an intercessor of a higher spiritual calibre who has already accessed to union with the Divine after he departed from this world. This search for intercessional assistance is coupled with vows and offerings at the shrine. (Ballard, 2006) These offerings are redistributed to the pilgrims of the shrine through langar or other means, and this circulation enhances and encourages social participation. (Jeffery, 1981)

Similarly, the baraka of B?b? Far?d, considered a contagious entity that may be absorbed by close contact with the grave and other things associated with him, has caused the local and trans-local folk’s continuous frequency at his grave. Richard Maxwell Eaton remarks in his analysis, that “…, the shrine of B?b? Far?d in Pakpattan provides a striking example of how Islam, the religion par excellence “of the Book,” has been in one instance mediated among common villagers most of whom were illiterate. For them it was the shrine, and so the Book, which manifested the juncture “where the contrasted poles of Heaven and Earth met.” Through its elaborate rituals and grand processions, the shrine displayed a sense of divine magnificence and divine mercy. It displayed, in short, the Court of God.” The shared motivation behind visiting the shrine of B?b? Far?d was to beseech him to fulfil a need and to thank him for his baraka. The shrine of B?b? Far?d was perceived as an analogue of the saint himself. While explaining certain of the shrine’s followers during a legal proceeding, Eaton remarks, “Indeed, many mur?ds referred to the saint and his shrine in the same term, sometimes defining themselves as mur?ds of the gadd?, or shrine. By conceptually fusing the saint and his shrine, mur?ds were able to understand the shrine as linking not only Heaven and Earth but also past and present. The shrine was B?b? Far?d.” (Eaton, 1982)

More commonly, help in the material needs remained the dominant motive behind the attendance. The pilgrims bring different offerings for the tomb; ch?dars (cloth sheet), flowers, garlands, and even oil for oil-lamps (d?y?). Devotees’ prayers could be understood as a form of bargaining for divine help, inspired by the saint's intercession, in return for offerings at the shrine. The pilgrims visiting the shrine of B?b? Far?d and taking petals, oils, salt, shakar, and other tabrruk?t from the shrine believe these articles to be a source of baraka of B?b? Far?d. It is commonly believed that the saint’s baraka imbues the places and things close to him. Therefore, the visitors during their few minutes inside the tomb B?b? Far?d, generally touch kiss, caress the grave and the ch?dar, offer prayers (f?ti?a and du??) and take some of the already scattered flower petals on the grave. These petals are meant to be eaten as an intercessional objects. The visitors also take them to their homes for their family members as blessed stuff or tabarruk for shaf?? (intercession). Pilgrims also eat the food, which has been cooked at the langar-kh?na (community kitchen) of the shrine. The relics of B?b? Far?d preserved at the shrine are considered as sources of radiation of his baraka. Similarly, the old cloth sheets (ornate ch?ddars) are preserved in the shrine storeroom for distribution to the pilgrims, in cut-pieces, as articles of baraka.

In the local history of Pakpattan, the shrine of B?b? Far?d has played a significant role in defining the face of local popular Islam. Over the centuries, B?b? Far?d has remained an immensely popular saint among the millions of villagers who inhabit southwestern Punjab. The shrine of B?b? Far?d is highly revered by many local clans who claim to have been converted to Islam collectively through ‘the agency of the shrine.’ The phenomenon led to the immense socio-religious power and influence of the shrine and its custodian family in the region over its huge following and created a social hierarchy from the d?v?n to the Chisht? clan and the clans of the mur?ds and the supporters of the custodians. Even the “…economic, political, and kinship ties between the shrine and its neighboring clans, the latter gradually became integrated into the shrine’s ritual functioning…” (Eaton, 1984) 

This was not limited only to the clans converted to Islam but extended to the Sikhs and Hindus of the region. In a broader societal context, the shrine of B?b? Far?d became a regional centre of moral authority, exercising legitimacy over inter-ethnic and intra-societal relationships. It proved to be a source of harmony amongst different religious communities of Pakpattan, and before Partition, non-Muslim used to take part in the shrine’s rituals regularly. For example, a Brahman of the town held the key of the Bahisht? Darv?za and the ?all-bard?r (ball-carrier) during the ritual of tav?f (circumambulation) used to be a Hindu. Similarly, Hindu elders of the H?n?? clan of the Khatr?s used to join hands with the D?v?n for the opening ceremony of the Bahisht? Darv?za. (Irving, 1911)

Although the local religious authority of the shrine of B?b? Far?d has regressed a lot in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the religious and spiritual linkage between the shrine itself and the locale is intact to a considerable extent. The shrine is a core sacred space in the town, and the local spiritual culture is representative of its long-lasting presence in the locale. The darg?h, of B?b? Far?d, is functioning as an intermediary institution for the circulation and redistribution of wealth, as did centuries back the saint’s kh?nq?h. For this purpose, various charity functions have been going on its premises since the earliest days. A proper langar-kh?na has been functioning since the early days of the shrine of B?b? Far?d. Similarly, at the time of the ‘urs, food is served from the langar to thousands of visitors, and the pilgrims also contribute toward the ‘urs celebrations at B?b? ???ib, according to their capabilities - distributing offerings. Qavv?l? plays an important role in upholding the status of the shrine of B?b? Far?d. The ritual attracts large audiences, and renowned qavv?ls of national and international fame come to Pakpattan. The annual ?urs of B?b? Far?d attracts devotees in large numbers preordaining a colossal activity in the city - a mel? or a huge festive fair is held outside the shrine. The town’s population increases many folds during the ?urs days, especially during the days of the opening of Bahisht? Darv?za. Even at present, the popular belief is intact that one who passes through this gate is blessed by God and gets his place in Heaven. Followers believe that by crossing the Bahisht? Darv?za, all of one’s sins are pardoned. Therefore, thousands of people struggle to pass through the Bahisht? Darv?za, hoping they will obtain Paradise. Prominent personalities, including politicians, mash?ikh (spiritual masters), sajj?da-nish?ns, and bureaucrats cross the Bahisht? Darv?za on the very first night, being given privilege over the ordinary devotees queued up barefooted outside the darg?h and across the city. This brings the saint, the city, and the mel? into the limelight in local and national media. In sum, the rituals followed regularly have happy consequences on the social life in the city.

The religious prominence of the shrine as B?b? Far?d’s house and being the principal sacred space in the region has remained intact amongst the faithful; however, its custodians’ prestige has shattered seriously, especially after the state’s intrusion into the internal matters; the traditional custodian of the shrine is gradually reduced to a mere ceremonial head of the institution. The absolute authority of the saint or the office bearer was thus replaced by the more or less omnipotent but nevertheless anonymous governmental position of the Auq?f administrators, at least partially. The difference, of course, was that the power of the new administrators was not theologically or religiously legitimized but only secularly and ideologically. Though the colonial state avoided such tendencies to disturb ritualistic matters, the post-Partition state systematically preferred to intrude into the centuries-old system of religious-cum-traditional rituals established at the shrine of B?b? Far?d.

The Auq?f Department has affected in many ways the shrine ritual set-up. Through various orders, the Department took over the shrine management along with attached properties, reducing the sajj?da-nish?n to the level of dependency for survival. Even further, the Department, on the one hand, changed the established norms themselves in their nature, and on the other hand, deprived the sajj?da-nish?n of the prerogative of the only individual authorized to perform those ceremonies. The Bahisht? Darv?za, which is a significant peculiarity of the shrine of B?b? Far?d, and that used to be opened for two nights (every year) since centuries only by the hereditary descendant of B?b? Far?d, is currently opened for five nights – and three of those by the state authorities. Thus, the temporal state authorities have reduced the authority of the shrine’s traditional custodian even inside the institution he headed uncontested for centuries. The state officials now manage the affairs of the shrine. On the one hand, the sajj?da-nish?n is reduced to be economically dependent on the stipend from the state for his and his family’s survival; on the other hand, he is also made dependent on the state approval for the performance of his reduced symbolic religious-spiritual role as the representative of the buried saint in the shrine.

Therefore, this state involvement has had a heavy impact on the local religious authority of the traditional custodian of the shrine of B?b? Far?d; a mere symbolic head of the shrine performing some rituals during the annual ?urs days, under official control. Moreover, this resulted in a gradual deterioration in the link between the shrine and the local population, thereby remodelling the shrine’s local authority. Now the tomb, the Bahisht? Darv?za and the other components of the shrine are there, mediating followers with the Divine, but the most important constituent of the institution, the sajj?da-nish?n, the visible representative of the saint, is invisible for his devotees except during some ?urs days.

Conclusion

From the above discussion, it can be gathered that the spiritual domain established by B?b? Far?d and furthered by his spiritual and lineal descendants gradually enhanced the prestige of his shrine, which in turn played a significant role in the religious and spiritual development of the local population of Punjab. During the pre-colonial centuries, the local system of authority around Pakpattan developed in such a way that the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d developed himself at the centre of the cultural life of the region through the rituals and ceremonies he managed and regulated at the shrine. Since its beginning, the rituals followed at the shrine regularly have had blissful results on the social life in the city. For example, the running of the welfare kitchen of the shrine has been feeding thousands of poor daily and has favored the development of a spirit of charity and care for the poor, and the annual ?urs has been an important source of cultural activities as well as of revenue for the city. However, after the mid-19th century, the shrine’s local and regional religious-spiritual authority developed in the pre-colonial period was dramatically altered by the encounter with the modern state; the state policies became more critical for the sajj?da-nish?n, and this made him gradually more and more dependent upon official settings. As far as the spiritual penetration of the shrine is concerned, its role degraded to a ceremonial institution over time. The role of jam??at-kh?na was meant to provide religious and spiritual education to the disciples gradually vanished. The colonizers intentionally refrained from disturbing the ritualistic traditions of the Sufi institutions, at large, except to a level of facilitation of affairs. However, the post-colonial state ultimately challenged the local authority of the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine of B?b? Far?d by interfering more fiercely into financial, managerial, and ritualistic matters of the shrine through the state institution of Auq?f. The ritualistic system followed at the shrine of B?b? Far?d is a source of the attraction of the mass of the local population to the shrine, enhancing its local attendance and following; the politicization of some main rituals has disturbed the traditional centuries-old ritualistic patterns of the shrine. Presently, the shrine itself is financially controlled and run by state officials, and the sajj?da-nish?n has become dependent on the state for his and his family’s survival and the performance of ceremonial functions of the shrine. Therefore, it can be concluded that the shrine’s religious prestige as B?b? Far?d’s house remained intact amongst the following. However, the modern state has profoundly affected the shrine's internal religious-spiritual matters and authority in Pakpattan during the recent decades, especially of the sajj?da-nish?n of the shrine. The religious role that the shrine holders performed in the earlier centuries is no more visible.

References

• AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar ChishtÄ«. (1884). Javāhir-i-FarÄ«dÄ«.
• AmÄ«r Khusrau. (n.d.). Rāḥat al-MuḥibbÄ«n (
• Anjum, T. (2009). Sons of Bread and Sons of Soul: Lineal and Spiritual Descendants of Bābā FarÄ«d and the issue of succession. In S. S. and I. D. Gaur (Ed.), Sufism in Punjab: Mystics, Literature and Shrines (pp. 63- 79). AAKAR Books.
• Ballard, R. (2006). Popular Islam in northern Pakistan and its reconstruction in urban Britain. Routledge.
• Chief Administrator Auqaf, L. (1995). Report.
• Eaton, R. M. (1982). Court of Man, Court of God: Local Perceptions of the Shrine of Baba Farid, Pakpattan, Punjab. Journal of Developing Societies, 17(44).
• Eaton, R. M. (1984). The Political and Religious Authority of the Shrine of Bābā FarÄ«d in Pakpattan, Punjab. Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam, 333-356.
• Ewing, K. (1983). The Politics of Sufism: Redefining the Saints of Pakistan. The Journal of Asian Studies, 42(2), 251- 268.
• Gellner, E. (1969). Saints of the Atlas. The nature of human society series. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.
• Hasht Bahisht: MajmÅ«Ê¿a-i- MalfÅ«zāt Khwājgān-i Chisht (Urdu tr.). (1996). Progressive Books.
• Irving, M. (1911). The Shrine of Baba Farid Shakarganj at Pakpattan. Journal of the Punjab Historical Society, 1, 70-76.
• Jeffery, P. (1981). Creating a scene: the disruption of ceremonial in a Sufi shrine. Ritual and Religion among Muslims in India, 166-194.
• Letter dated March 2, 1968, by the Administrator Auqāf, Lahore.
• Letter No. ZAP/A-II/Auqaf 2008/3642, Dated January 21, 2008, from the Zonal Administrator Auqāf, Pakpattan Zone to to Chief Administrator Auqāf Punjab, Lahore. (n.d.)
• Markovits, C. (2004). A history of modern India, 1480-1950. Anthem Press.
• Muhammad Mubeen. (2015). Evolution of the ChishtÄ« shrine and the ChishtÄ«s in Pakpattan (Pakistan). In Devotional Islam in Contemporary South Asia (pp. 119-137). Routledge.
• Nizami, K. A. (1955). The life and times of Shaikh Farid-u'd-Din Ganj-i-Shakar (9). Department of History, Muslim University.
• Notification No. 3(4)-Auqāf/60, dated January 17, 1961.
• Office File
• Order No. SOP-2 5(17)1 dated July 07, 1990, by the Chief Administrator Auqaf, Lahore.
• Order No. SOP 5(17)1, dated April 30, 2008, Office of the Chief Administrator Auqāf Punjab, Lahore.
• Order No. SOP 5(17)1, dated January 11, 2008, by the Chief Administrator Auqaf, Lahore.
• Respondent answer to the petition of 1968 dated April 15, 1969.
• Rozehnal, R. (2006). Faqir or faker?: The Pakpattan tragedy and the politics of Sufism in Pakistan. Religion, 36(1), 29-47.
• Writ Petition No. 437 of 1968, dated March 25, 1968, in the High Court of West Pakistan.