View
219
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 1/36
The Portable Bullhe Shah: Biography, Categorization, and Authorship in the Study of Punjabi
Sufi PoetryAuthor(s): Robin RinehartSource: Numen, Vol. 46, Fasc. 1 (1999), pp. 53-87Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3270291 .
Accessed: 10/03/2014 19:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Numen.
http://www.jstor.org
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 2/36
THE PORTABLEBULLHE SHAH: BIOGRAPHY,
CATEGORIZATION,
AND AUTHORSHIP
IN THE STUDY
OF
PUNJABI UFI POETRY1
ROBIN
RINEHART
Summary
The
Punjabi
poet
Bullhe
Shah
1680-1758)
s revered
y
Muslims,
Hindus nd
Sikhs.
n
the extensive
ody
of
nterpretive
iteratureevoted o his ife and
work,
scholars avecontested
is
religiousdentity,
haracterizing
ullhe
Shah n
various
ways, .g.
as
a
Sufi,
Vedantic
ufi,
r
a
Vaisnava
Vedantic ufi.This
article
xam-
ines
the
nature f thedebates bout
Bullhe
Shah's
identity,
nd
how thesedebates
have haped hevaryingortrayalsfBullhe hah's ife, he orpus fhispoetry,nd
the characterizationf his
religious
ffiliation.
argue
hat
series
f
unexamined
assumptions
about
henature
f
biography
nd its
relation
o the
development
of
a
worldview,
bout he
ategorization
f
religious dentity,
nd about
henature
of
authorship
have
created
hese
onflicting
ortrayals
f the
poet
and his
work,
making
ullhe
Shah
a kind f
"portable"
igure
ho s
placed
n
widely
ivergent
contexts.conclude
y rguing
hat
ullhe hah's
portability,
rhis
placement
ithin
differentontexts
for
different
urposes),
s
itself
useful
opic
for
nalysis,
nd
provides
he
basis
for
potentially
ore ruitful
tudy
ot
nly
f
Bullhe
Shah's ife
and
work,
ut lso
of his
audiences
nd their
esponses
o him.
There s noHindu, heres noMuslim,
Let
us
abandon
ur
pride
nd sit
together
ike
young irls
t their
pinning
wheels
I
am neither unninor hi'ah. 've
chosen he
path
f the
ineage
f
peace.
BullheShah2
I
Portions
f
this
paper
were
presented
t
the 1996 conferencef theAmerican
Academy
f
Religion
nNew
Orleans,
A,
and
at
the
1997
Seventh nternational
Conference
n
Early
Literature
n New
ndo-Aryananguages
n
Venice,
taly.
he
authorwould iketo thank onference
articipants
or heir
omments,
s
well as
Tony
K.
Stewart
nd
Patricia
onahue,
who read earlier rafts f
this
paper
and
made
very elpful uggestions.
2
Punjabi
verse
from
ayyad
Nazir
Ahmad,
Kaldm-e-Bullhe
hdh,
p.
83.
This
and subsequentranslationsre the author's. orother ersions f thispoem, ee
?
Koninklijke
rill
NV,
Leiden
1999)
NUMEN,
Vol. 46
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 3/36
54 RobinRinehart
In the ndian
ubcontinent,
here ommunalonflictsre
tragic
yet
ommonplace
eature
f
the
andscape,
t
s
intriguing
nd
per-
haps
ronic
o
find
poet
laimed
y
different
eligious
ommunities.
The
popularity
f
Bullhe
hah's
oetry
rosses othhe
ontemporary
communaloundaries
etween
he
eligious
raditions
f
slam,
in-
duism,
nd
Sikhism,
nd
the
political
order etween
akistannd
India hat ivides he
Punjabi-speaking
egion.
usicians,
rom he
amateur
inger
ho
performs
or
neighborhood
riends
nd
family,
to
nternationally
cclaimedrtists
uch s Nusrat ateh
Ali
Khan,
sing
is
poems.
ines romome fhismost elebrated
oems
ave
entered
he
Punjabi anguage
s
everyday
diomatic
hrases.
here
are ountless
rinted
ditions
fhisworkn both
he
Gurmukhi
nd
Urdu
cripts.
e
figuresrominently
n
most
urveys
f
Punjabi
iter-
ature,
nd
heres
an
extensive
ody
f
nterpretive
iterature
evoted
to
analysis
fhis
biography,
is ntellectual
evelopment,
is
iterary
style,
ndhisworldview.llthosewhowritebout im
hapsodize
about he
eceptivelyimple legance
fhis
poetry,
he
eauty
f
his
expression
fhis
onging
or
God,
ndhis killful
seof
mages
rom
the
veryday
ife ndfolklore
f
the
ural
unjab.
Bullhe
hah's ross-communal
opularity
aises
many ntriguing
questionsbout eligiousnd communaldentityn the ndian ub-
continent,
ndtheres
in
fact vast
body
f
nterpretive
iterature
concerning
ullhe hah's
ife
and work. his
iterature,owever,
raises
many
more
uestions
han
t
answers.or
here
s no consen-
susas to who Bullhe hah
was,
how
he
livedhis
ife,
where is
religiousllegiances
ay,
revenhow o read he
message
f
his
po-
etry.
ndeed
irtuallyvery
spect
f Bullhe
hah's ife nd work
is
contested,
rom
he
asicoutlines
f
his
ife
o
the
mport
fhis
poetry.nterpreters
ave
ought
o claim im or ne
religious
om-
munity
r
another.
n
some
tudies,ullhe
hah s
presented
s
an
Singh, . 78; Faqir,p. 218; Ramakrishna,. 65; Rafat, . 177. The referenceo the
spinning
heel s common n
Punjabi
poetry;
t referso the
practice
f
young irls
getting
ogether
o
spin
cloth
s
part
f their
owry.
he
young
irls
re
ikened
o
humans
reparing
o meet
God.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 4/36
The Portable ullhe hah 55
enthusiastic
dvocate f
the
Hindu
radition;
n
others
e
is
a
model
Muslim,
nd in still
others,
e
is
shown o
have
been
deeply
n-
fluenced
y
Sikhism.Over
a
century's
orth f
study
has created
multiple,
adically ivergentortrayals
f this ne
poet.
But a closer ook
at
this
scholarly
iterature,
ith ts
divergent
views
of the
poet
and his
work,
makesclear that or
ll
its
paeans
to
objective
istorical
econstruction,
t s at heartmore
evealing
f
the
personal
nd/or ommunal iases of
the
nterpreters
hemselves.
The central
rgument
f this
ssay
s that henature f
the
tudy
f
Bullhe Shah
itself the
questions
sked,
and
the
ways
n which
those uestions avebeen answered has led toan interpretivem-
passe
that
eveals
armore
bout
BullheShah's critics han
nything
about
Bullhe
Shah
as a historical
igure.
hese
conflictingnalyses
are
produced
y
three
losely
related
ssumptions
bout
a)
the
na-
ture f
biographical
nformation
nd ts relation
o the
development
of
a
worldview,
b)
about henature
f
religious
dentity
nthe
ndian
subcontinent
n
the 18th
nd
20th
enturies,
nd
c)
about henature
of
authorship.
hey
re further
omplicated
y
the imitationsf the
manuscript
nd
other vidence
vailable.
My argument
s
based
upon
a
reading
f the
range
f
critical
work
ublished
n
Bullhe Shah
n
Pakistan,
ndia,
nd north merica
nd
Europe.
Rather han
resent-
ing detailed econstructionfthedifferentnterpretationsf Bullhe
Shah,
will describe he
general trategies
presuppositions,
se
of
evidence,
orms f
argument)
sed
n
varying egrees
n
virtually
ll
of these
tudies,
egardless
f their inal onclusions bout
Bullhe
Shah.3
Obviously
not
all
the
analyses
f
Bullhe
Shah which cite
use
all the
strategies
hat
detail
below,
but each exhibits
ome of
the
general
endencies
hat
will
describe.
he
goal
of
many
rit-
ical
studies f Bullhe Shah and his
work s to anchorhim
firmly
within
pecific
istoricalnd
religious
ontexts,
ontexts hich erve
to
"explain"
he
poet
n some
way.
Yet
the fact
hat
ifferentnter-
preters
ave
placed
Bullhe Shah
n such different
ontexts
uggests
3
For
a moredetailed iscussion
f the
ange
f
nterpretations
f
Bullhe
Shah's
life nd
work,
ee
Rinehart,
Interpretations
f
Bullhe
Shah,"
nternationalournal
of
Punjab
Studies,
,
1
(1996),
pp.
45-63.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 5/36
56 RobinRinehart
that
e
has n fact
ecome kind
f
portable"
igure.
conclude
y
suggesting
han
close
nalysis
f
this
ery portability"
Bullhe
Shah's ocation
n differentontexts
helps
s to understand
ot
only omething
bout he
oet
himself,
ut lso
about is udiences
and he
arying
ays
nwhich
hey
espond
ohis
poetry
nd tories
ofhis ife.
The
cholarlynalyses
f
Bullhe
hah
all
oughly
nto wo
major
groups:
ne
places
ullhe hah
quarely
ithin
he slamic
radition,
and
the
otherocates
ullhe hah's
true
nspiration
n theHindu
tradition.
here re ubsets
ithinach
group.
n
the
slamic
roup,
some ortrayullhe hah s a Sufi hampionfthe ppressede.g.
Taufiq
afat,
ayyad
Nazir
Ahmad),
therss
a
pious
followerf
Islamic
aw.4
n
the
Hindu
roup,
ome
tyle
im Vedantin
the
most
prominentxample
eing
ajwanti
amakrishna),
thers
Vaisnava
Vedantin
e.g.
Sadhu
Ram
Sharda),
nd
still thers
rgue
hat
e
was
profoundly
nfluenced
y
thewords
f
the
arly
ikh
gurus
s
well
e.g.
Surindar
ingh
Kohli).5
n thediscussionhat
ollows,
will
provide epresentative
xamples
rom
ach
camp,
with urther
references
n thenotes.
Bullhe hah and
Biography
The
starting
oint
ormost tudiesf
Bullhe
hah eemsnno-
cent
nough.6
hen ndwhere
as
he
born?What ind
f
ducation
4
See also Ghafran
ayyad,
.
16;
Kuldip
Singh, .
47; Rafat,
.
3.
5
See,
for
xample,
Kala
Singh
Bedi, "Bullhe
hch
de Kaldmdd
GurbdnI
dl
Tulndtmak
dhiain"
n Rattan
ingh
Jaggi,
d.,
Khoj
Patrikd,
ain
Bullhe
Shah
Ank
Patiala:
Publication
ureau,
Punjabi
University,
991),
pp.
134-150.This is
an
especially ntriguingrgument,
or ts
proponents enerally
ee the nfluence
of Sikhism
n
seemingly uasi-Vedantic
tatementsttributed
o
Bullhe
Shah.
The
unstated
ssumption,
hen,
s
that
ikhism
s
very
much
part
f the
Hindu
radition,
a
notion
t
odds
withmuch f the olonial nd
postcolonial
olitics
frecent ikhism
(which
has
sought
o distance tself
rom
Hinduism).
6 See, for xample, harda, . 149; AtamSingh, . 2; Ramakrishna,p.40-41,
43-46; Kohli,
pp.
12-23;Bhatti,
p.
1-4,
12-13;Puri
nd
Shangari,
p.
1-31;
Bhasa
VibhagPunjab,pp.
5-11; Kaur,
pp.
1-4;
Kuldip Singh,
pp.
1-18; Rafat,
p.
1-6;
Ahmad,
.
5.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 6/36
The Portable ullheShah 57
did his
family
rovide
or
him?
What was the social status
f his
family?
What
werethe formativenfluences
n
his
early
ife?
What
was his
religiousdentity? nfortunately
or
historians,
he nforma-
tion s
sketchy.
ost
agree
that ullhe Shah ivedfrom
680-1758,
that
he
was born
nto
family
f
Sayyid
Muslims
i.e.
who
traced
their escent
rom
he
amily
f the
prophet
uhammad),
nd that e
received he ducation
ypical
or
young
man
of
such
status.nter-
estingly,
ost tudies on't
ctually
escribewhat uch neducation
would
be;
it
s
implied
hat
t would
ntail
nstructionn
Arabic nd
Persian,
with
tudy
f
the
Quran,
he
slamic
egal
tradition,
nd
the
Persian
iterary
radition.he evidence or uchclaims s the work
attributed
o
Bullhe
Shah,
which ontains eferences
o
the
Quran,
the slamic
egal
tradition,
nd Persian
ufi
iterature.
What s the
purpose
f such
uestions? hrough roviding
nswers
to
them,
nterpreters
stablish
ullheShah
as
a
historical
igure
ho
lived n
a
particular
ime
nd
place.
Having
stablishedhe ime
nd
place, they
an
then
dentify
ertain
ocial,
political,
eligious,
nd
other
actors hich
might
ave had a
bearing
n his
ife.Such
gen-
eral
nformation,
long
with
nformationbout he
ype
f
family
nto
which
he was
born,
nd
the
education
e
received,
s
presumed
o
reveal heforces
hat
haped
his
worldview.
lthough
here s indeed
consensus n themost asicdetails f
Bullhe
Shah's
early
ife,
what
follows rom
hese etails
s
less
easy
to
establish.
While
we can cer-
tainly
escribe
he
social,
religious,
nd
political
limate f Bullhe
Shah's time n
very
eneral
erms,
ehavenoevidence hat emon-
strates
onclusively
ow this limate ffected
ullhe
Shah.And even
if
we can establish acts bout his
family
nd
their
eligious
lle-
giances,
hisdoes
not
necessarily
mean
that
ullhe
Shah had
those
same
religiousllegiances,lthough
his s what
most
nterpreters
ug-
gest.
For
example,
n discussions
f therole
of Bullhe
Shah's
family
environment
n
shaping
is
thought,
he
uestion
withwhichmost re
concerneds whetherullheShah'sfather as a strict ollower f s-
lamic
aw,
or a Sufiwho was not
overly
oncerned
ith
following
law to the etter. he conclusion hatmost
nterpreters
each s more
a functionf their wn
reading
f Bullhe Shah's worldviewhan
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 7/36
58 RobinRinehart
reflection
f
any
conclusivevidence
ne
way
or
theother.nter-
preters
ho
lace
Bullhe
hah
n some
ategory
elatedoHinduism
are
particularly
een o demonstrate
hat
ullhe
hahtranscended
what
hey
onsiderhe
dry egalism
f
slam t
a
young ge
as he
moved owards
higher
evel
f
spiritualomprehension
Vaipsava
Vedanta r
Vedanta).
ant
ingh
ekhon nd
Kartar
ingh
uggal,
for
xample,
rite f
Bullhe
hah's romantic
efiancef
Muslim
sharia."7
The ntention
most
ften
nstated)
f
hese
reliminary
uestions
about
ullhe hah's ife nd imes
s
to
establish
ullhe hah
within
a nexus
f
factors
social,
eligious,olitical,
ducational,
amily-
related)
hich
will
both
eterminend
explain
he
ontentf
his
poetry.
he thread f the
rgument
eems o
be that
nce
we have
established
ullhe
hah
s
having
een
haped
y
these
articular
forces,
ecan hen etermineis
particular
orldview,
hich ill e
reflected
nhis
work.
hus
he nitial
onjecture
bout
ullhe
hah's
early
ife s
gradually
eifiedntohistorical
facts";
hese acts
re
then
sedto
support
urther
onjecture.
ome
argue
or
lifelong
consistency
n Bullhe hah's
work;
thers
ee evidence or series
of
developmental
hases
ulminating
n
final,
ost dvanced orld-
view. heassumptions that hedetails fBullhe hah's iography
will
hen
lluminateither
osition:
ither
e
adopted
ndmaintained
a
particular
orldviewt some
point
n
his
life,
r
he
developed
through
eries f
ystematic
tages
hat
roduce
meaningful,
ecov-
erable
attern
o
his
hought.
The
problem
ith hismethod
s that
t
creates
circular
rocess
of
nterpretation.
any
f
he
etails
hat
rovide
he awmaterialor
Bullhe
hah's
iographies
ave een
gleaned
rom
is
poetry;
hese
details now nstantiated
facts"
in turn
re
used to
explain
ther
aspects
f
his
poetry.
hus
nterpreters
se
Bullhe
hah's
ife
o
ex-
plain
his
poetry,
ndhis
poetry
o
explain
is ife.Yet eldom
an
7
Sekhon
nd
Duggal, p.
71. Formoreon
Bullhe
Shah and Islamic
aw,
see
Sharda,
p.
157-60;
Atam
ingh, .
6;
Ramakrishna,
p.
47-49; Kohli,
.
41;
Kuldip
Singh, .
47;
Rafat,
.
3;
Sayyad, .
16.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 8/36
ThePortable ullhe hah 59
either
trategy
e
grounded
n solid
historical
vidence. ur vidence
about
Bullhe
hah's
ife,
eyond
hatwhich
may
be
inferredrom
is
poems,
s
sketchy
s best.To be
sure,
here re
multiple
agiograph-
ical accounts
which
provide
wealth
f
alleged
nformationbout
significant
ventsn his
ife,
ut
hey
re
grounded
n
the imsof ha-
giography,
ot
ritical
istoriography.
he
interpreters
ever eemto
take
nto
ccount
hat he
primary
ource fthis
llegedly
istorical
materials
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry
and even
that
ody
of work s
problematic.
The
Bullhe
hah
Corpus
As
part
of
their
nalysis
f
Bullhe
Shah,
most
nterpreters
lso
seek
to define
corpus
of work
clearly
uthored
y
the historical
Bullhe
hah.
The
earliest
urviving
anuscripts
f Bullhe hah's
po-
etry
ate o at east
one
hundred
ifty ears
fter
is death.
he
writ-
ten
manuscripts
re
transcriptions
f musical
erformances
f
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry;
hey
eflect ialectal
ariations,
pparent
nterpolations
and elaborations
rom he
performers
hemselves,
nd
n some
cases
versesor entire
oems
that
re
found n the
works f other
oets
(often
with
he
ignature
ine of
another
oetpreserved
ntact).
ub-
sequent rintedditions howthat hecorpus fpoetryttributedo
Bullhe
Shah both
varies
widely,
nd
has
expanded
ubstantially
ver
time,
developmentypical
f the workof
many
medieval ndian
poets.
f we
begin
our
analyses
f Bullhe
Shah
by
positing
im
as
a
historical
igure
with
n
identifiable
orpus
f
work,
we are
im-
mediately
acedwith n insurmountable
roblem
we can
neither
establish
hehistoricaletails
fBullhe
hah's ife
with
ny
ertainty,
nordo we have
themeans
o
establishwhich
oems mong
hose
t-
tributedo
himwere
omposed
y
Bullhe
Shah
thehistorical
igure.
Howthen s the
orpus
efined?
The
implicit
ssumption
f Bullhe
Shah's
nterpreters
s
thathid-
den somewhere ithin he
fanciful,
onflicting
ictures
ainted
n
hagiographies,
nd somewhere
ithin he
overgrown
orpus
f
po-
ems ttributedo Bullhe hah
ies a
clearly
efinable istorical
igure,
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 9/36
60 Robin
Rinehart
who
roduced
doctrinally
nd
tylistically
onsistent
ody
f
poetry,
andwho
may
e uncovered.
et
we have
ittle
nformationtherhan
the
hagiographical
radition
ith
hich
o
establish
etails
f
Bullhe
Shah's
ife,
nd
virtuallyothing
ther han he
oetry
ttributedo
Bullhe
hah
o define
is
philosophy
nd
worldview
if
ndeed
e
was
philosophically
onsistent
hroughout
is
ife).
fthe
nformation
about
is
ife s
problematic,
nd
he
orpus
fhis
poetry
s
suspect
(at
east
nsofar
s
attributing
ithero
historically
ocatable
igure),
then
sing
neto
establishhe ther
s
clearly
difficultethod
o
defend. ut his s
the
nstatedactic
sed
byvirtually
ll
nterpretersofBullhe
hah,
nd t becomeshefoundationor urther
nalyses
and ssertions
bout
ullhe hah.
Interpreters
irst
f all
assume
hat ullhe
hah's
ife
haped
is
worldview,
notion
hich hen ecomes he
basis
for
etermining
the
uthenticity
f
the
various
oems
ttributedo
him.
Once
nter-
pretersosit particular
eading
f Bullhe
hah's
ife
for
xample
as
a
law-follower,
r
egally
ax
Sufi)
hey
an
hen se that
eading
as
a
criterionor
etermining
hich
oems
re uthentic.f
Bullhe
Shah
was a
strictollower
f
slamic
aw,
hen
ny
oems
which re
critical
f
slamic
awmust e
spurious.
lternatively,
f
Bullhe hah
was ax nhisobservancef aw, uch oemsmust egenuine.r,
if
one
posits
series f
developmental
hases,
hen
poem
ejecting
Islamic
aw
could
be
attributed
ither o an
early
r ater
hase
f
development.
he
result
s
satisfying
or
nterpreters,
or
his ircular
hermeneutic
trategy
imultaneously
roduces
more
harply
ocused
corpus
f
poetry
nd
biography.
t
not
nly
liminates
articularo-
ems,
but
lso
any
problematic
biographical"
nformationn those
poems.
t s
on
the asis fthese inds f
preliminarynquiries
nto
the actors
nderstood
o have
haped
is ife based
upon
eading
Bullhe
hah's
ife nto is
work,
ndhis
work
nto is ife
and
sing
oneto defendhe
ther)
that
nterpreters
uild
heir
laims bout
Bullhe hah's ommunaldentityndworldview.8
8
Hawley
has identified similar
rocess
t
work n the traditions
urrounding
the
medieval
Hindi
poet
Sfirdis,
whose
poems
are used to
generate agiographical
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 10/36
ThePortable ullheShah 61
The
Categorizationf
Religious
dentity
This
circular
ermeneutic
trategy
an
easily
serve
the
purposes
of an
interpreter
ho wishesto establish
ullhe
Shah
as
a
repre-
sentative
f a
particular
ommunity
r
worldview.
When
nterpreters
try
o
identify
nd
name
Bullhe
Shah's
worldview,
hey
irst f all
presuppose
particular
deological
ramework,
ith n
implicit
n-
derstanding
f the
range
f
possibilities
vailable.What
deological
categories
ere vailable
o a late
seventeenth/early
ighteenth
en-
tury
oet?
For
most
nterpreters,
he
question
t itsmostbasic evel
resolvesnto wofundamentalategories:slam ndHinduism.ullhe
Shah
mustbe
placed
n
either ne or the other
f
these
ategories.
Yet to make o
seeminglyimple
classifications not
nly
difficult,
but lso
politically harged.
As
is the
case
with
many
ther
oets
of northndia
e.g.
Kabir,
Gurn
Nanak),
he
poetry
ttributed
o
Bullhe
Shah contains lements
that
nterpreters
ssociate
with oth Islam" and "Hinduism."
ullhe
Shah's
vocabulary
s themost ommon
tarting
oint
or
nterpreters;
they
ocus on terms
hat he
poet
used
for
xpressing vertly
eli-
giousconcepts
e.g.
namesfor
god, terminology
or tates
f
mysti-
cal
realization).9nterpretersenerally
ssume hat heuse of words
whose
origin
s Persian r Arabic ndicates
predilection
owards
Islam;
the use of Sanskrit
r
Sanskrit-derived
ords
Hinduism.'o
Surindar
ingh
Kohli,
who
styles
Bullhe
Shah
a
Vedantin,
ists a
number
f
Sanskrit-derived
ordsfor ove
from ullhe
Shah's
po-
ems as
a
means
of
bolstering
is
assertion hat
Bullhe
Shah
was
accounts,
which
n turn ffect he
reading
f
the
poems
attributed
o him. John
Stratton
awley,
Authornd
Authority,".
280.
9
There
s
one
interpreter
ho
challenges
his
trategy:
rilochan
ingh,
n
his
article
Bullhe
hah
ddt
asawwuf'
p.
430)
argues
hat he
imple sage
of
a Hindu
term orGod
does not
necessarily
akeone
a
Hindu.
10Usbornep. 10) for xample,writes hatBullhe Shah'spoems"showvery
little
laboration
f
thought
r
magination.
ome
of them avea
larger
roportion
of Sanskrit ords han ne
might
xpect
n
a
Muslim
writer,
ut his
may
be because
there
werefewerArabic nd
Persianwords n
Panjabi
t the ime."
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 11/36
62 RobinRinehart
influenced
y
Hinduismmore
han
slam."
And
Sadhu
Ram
Sharda,
who considers
ullhe
Shah
a
Vaisnava
Vedantin,
rgues
hat
ven
in
poems
n which
Bullhe
Shah
uses slamic
erminology,
the
pirit
thereins
undoubtedly
edanta."2
n
contrast,
aufiq
afat,
who
por-
trays
ullhe
hah s Sufi
hampion
f he
ppressed,
rgues
hat ven
when
Bullhe
Shah makesreferenceo Hindu
deas,
he uses
Arabic
phrases
o make tclear hat e is firstnd foremost
Muslim.13
n-
terpreters
lso
weigh
he
elative
requency
f referenceso the
myth,
history,
nd literature
f
Islam
and Hinduism. here re
yet
further
characterizationshat re ess
clearly efined,et
t
theheart f
many
interpretations:
amely,
he
nterpreter's
eneral
mpression
fBullhe
Shah's
worldview,
ased
upon
the
nterpreter'seading
f
his
poetry.
Perhaps
he best llustrationf this
trategy
s
a
chart
ound
n
Ahmad's
edition
f
Bullhe
Shah's
poems,
whichhe
considers
he
most
valuable
art
f
his effort.
e
askednine
Punjabi
poets
oread
sixty-six oems
ttributed
o
Bullhe
Shah
poems
which
ad
already
been
chosenfor
Ahmad's
dition)
nd selectthe
ones
that
eemed
authentic
o
them.Ahmad
notes
that he
poems
that
received
he
highest
umber f votes
rom he
poets
were
lso those
most eloved
by
the
people.14
or
Ahmad,
whoseBullhe hah
s a
champion
f
the
oppressed,t s the people"whocanrecognizehegenuinerticle.
Similarly,
bdul
Majid
Bhatti stablishes he
"style
nd
point
f
view" of Bullhe
Shah
as a
criterionor
etermining
uthentic
oems;
he furtherotes hat
n
these
rounds
e eliminated
oems
ttributed
to Bullhe hahwhichwerenot
directly
elated o the
Quran
nd
other
Islamic
iterature,
nd nstead ontained eferencesothe
Ganges
iver
(sacred
o
Hindus)
nd
Shdm
"the
dark
ne";
an
epithet
f
Krishna)
as God.15
t
is those
very
ame
poems
which
provide
vidence
or
thosewho wishto
style
ullhe
Shah
a
Vaisnava.
Ramakrishnaotes
1
Kohli,
p.
43.
12
Sharda, . 150.
13
Rafat,
.
18.
14
See
Ahmad's hart
t
the nd
of his
"Introduction"
o
Kaldm-e-Bullhe
hdh.
15
Bhatti,
.
10.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 12/36
ThePortable ullheShah 63
that here re
many oems
ttributed
o
Bullhe
hah,
but
he
uthentic
ones
re
distinguished
y
his force nd
implicity."16
he cites
oems
which he
believes o
exemplify
Vedantic
pirit
even
when
they
contain
slamic
references).17
either
hatti's
style
nd
point
of
view" nor
Ramakrishna's
force nd
simplicity"
s
explained,
ut
each was
clearly
crucial
oncept
n
these
nterpretations.
Other
nterpreters
elyupon
their ense
of
Bullhe
Shah's use
of
rhyme
nd
meter,
nd stablishhis s
a
criterionf
uthenticity.
afat
maintainshat ullheShah
followed
o
particular
ules f
rhyme
r
meter,
hereasAhmad
rgues
hatmetrical
onsistency
s
an indica-
tion
of an authentic
ullhe
Shah
poem
in
some
instances
e
rear-
ranged
he ines
of
versesfrom ther ditions
nd
performances
o
create
new
metrically
onsistent,
nd
therefore
uthentic,
oems).18
It
is
important
o
note
herethat
particular
nterpreter's
ense
of
what
ctually
onstitutes
he
"real"
corpus
f
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry
itself
hapes
he
nterpreter'seading
fthe
worldview
fthat
orpus;
the
nterpretivetrategy
hus ar s based
upon
a series f
mutually
dependent
actors
life,
poetry,
orldview none of which
has
an
independent
rounding
ith utside
vidence o
support
t.
The
degree
f
circularity
ncreases.
Themost ignificantiftsmergemongBullheShah's nterpreters
as
they
efine
is
religiousdentityyplacing
imwithin
particular
category. mong
hose
who
categorize
ullheShah
as
first
nd fore-
most
Muslim,
his
precise lacement
ithin n Islamicframework
varies.
While he is
virtuallylways
cast
as a
Sufi,
o
some,
he was
a
Sufi
who adhered
irmly
o thedictates
f
slamic
aw,
nd to
oth-
ers,
he
was
a
Sufiwhose
ntense
mystical
xperiences
ranscendedhe
needfor
predictably
ry egalism.
or hosewho ocateBullhe
hah
withinheHindu
radition,
here
re
particularhallenges.
hathehad
some connection ith slam cannot e denied
his
very
name,
fter
all,
suggests
hat
he
was
Muslim,
nd not
Hindu),
nd
thus
Bullhe
16
Ramakrishna,
.
64.
17
Ramakrishna,
.
64.
18
Rafat,
.
29; Ahmad,
p.
11,
12.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 13/36
64 Robin
Rinehart
Shah
s defined
n
varying
uises
s a Vedantic
ufi,
r sometimes
a
Vaisnava
edantic
ufi.
nterpreters
aking
hese
ategorizations
give
nly
ominal
ecognition
o
slam,
nd
rgue
hat he
eal
heart
of
Bullhe
hah's
eligiosity
s
in Vedantar
Vaisnava
edanta.
Bullhe
hah's
nterpreters'cceptance
f slam
nd
Hinduism
s
the
ppropriate
asic
ategories
ests
pon
hree
ey
resuppositions:
a. Islam and Hinduism re twodistinct
eligious
raditions,
ach
with
clear,
efining
eatures,
nd
definable,
ometimes
ierarchically
ranked
ubsets,
uch
s
Sufismas
a subset
f slam)
nd
Vedanta/Vai-
snava
Vedanta
as
subsets
f
Hinduism).
nterpretersroceed
s if
there
ere
elf-evident,
greed pon
nderstandings
f
what onsti-
tutes
slam
nd
Hinduisms distinct
ategories.
hus t s self-evident
that
nterpreters
hould sk nto
which f the woBullhe hah
fits;
the
way
o make uch determination
s
to
nventory
he
features
of his
poetry,
nd
assign
hem o their
espective
ategories.
hen
there
re
features
ssociated ith
oth
ategoriesresent,nterpreters
adopt
ifferent
trategies.
ome
adopt "majority
ules" riterion
by weighing
he
features
gainst
ne
another,
ith he
majority
f
references
etermining
he
dominant
ategory
more
eferenceso
"Islamic" lementshan Hindu" lements eans ullhe hahwas
Muslim).
thers
nvokeriteria
f
uthenticity
nd
philosophicalu-
rity:
f
the
nterpreter
s inclinedo
place
Bullhe
hah
n
the
at-
egory
f
slam,
hen Hindu" eaturesre
ikely
o be
considered
non-authenticccretions
n the
Bullhe
hah
orpus
and
of course
similar
trategy
s
possible
or
omeone
ishing
o
place
Bullhe hah
within Hindu
ramework).
b. There re
distinct,
dentifiable
oundaries
etweenslam
and Hin-
duism,
nd
as so
conceived,
slam and Hinduism
ave
nothing
n
commonwith ne another
thus
n idea
is eitherslamic
or
Hindu,
butnotboth). ny orm f
religious
xpression
hichontainsle-
ments rom
hese
wo
eparateategorical
onstructs
equiresxpla-
nation,
hichn
some ases nvolveshe reationf a
"hybrid"
r
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 14/36
The Portable ullhe hah 65
"syncretist"ategory,
uch s
"Vedantic
ufi."19he
basic
categorical
structures assumed o be
valid,
nd n a case where
Bullhe
Shah's
expression
eemsnotto fit he
existing
ategories,
ither new
hy-
brid
ub-category
s
created,
r t s
assumed
hat
here s a
problem
in
the
poet's corpus
tself
i.e.
if
nterpreters
ould determine
hich
of the
poems
ttributedo
BullheShah
are
authentic,
hose uthentic
poems
would
surely ield
clear
philosophical ategory).
hat the
categories
hemselves
imply
might
otbe the orrect nes to
nvoke
forBullheShahis notan
option
hat he
nterpreters
onsider;
he
categories
hemselvesre not
hallenged.
c.
The
categories
Islam" and
"Hinduism"
nd the
boundaries ow
understoodo
eparate
hem ave remained
onstant i.e. twentieth-
century
onceptionsf
what onstituteIslam" and "Hinduism"
may
be read back nto
Bullhe
hah's
lifetime.
urrent
onceptions
f Is-
lam and
Hinduism
re to a
large
xtent he
product
f
colonial nd
post-colonial
iscussions
f
religious dentity,
nd
reflect oncerns
which re
ikely
uite
differentrom
ny
we
might
dentify
n
Bullhe
Shah's time. n the
present
ay,
here re
multiple nderstandings
f
"Islam" and "Hinduism."t is
therefore
specially
ritical hat nter-
preters
e clear aboutwhat
xactly
hey
mean when
they
se
such
labels,whethert be for hepresent r thepast. Theymust ealize
that heir wn
understanding
f "Islam" or "Hinduism"
whether
they pell
t
out
or not
may
not
be the same
understanding
hat
their eaders ave.And
they
must
lso
take
nto
ccount
he
fluidity
of
such
ategories
ver
ime.
f
we are
treating
ullheShahas a his-
torical
igure
ho ived t a
specific
ime,
n
a
specific
lace,
whose
worldview
as
shaped
n
part
y
the
ocial
and
religious
limate
f
his
time,
hen
we
musthave a clear dea of whatthat
ocial and
religious
limate
was. How did
people
conceive f Islam
and Hin-
duism n the
early ighteenthentury? erhaps
hehistorical
igure
19
For a veryuseful iscussion f theproblems fusingterms uch as "syn-
cretism" nd
"hybrid",
ee
Tony
K. Stewart nd Carl
Ernst,
Syncretism"
n Peter
Claus
and
Margaret
Mills,
eds.,
South
Asian
Folklore:
An
Encyclopedia
Garland
Press,
orthcoming).
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 15/36
66 RobinRinehart
Bullhe hahdid
not
hink
n
terms f "Islam" nd "Hinduism"
s
definitive
ategories,
nd
other
ategories
ay
havebeen
f
greater
import
o him.
While
most
nterpreters
o not skthese
uestions,
they
re
central
o
a
defense f
the
nterpretations
hat
hey
on-
struct.
Despite
uch
fundamental
roblems
n
the
move
o
categorize
Bullhe hah,
nterpretersenerally
roceed
rom his
oint y
ad-
ducing
vidence or
he
articular
ategorical
lassificationhat
hey
have hosen. he
nterpreter
ho abels
ullhe
hah
Vedanticufi
presentsoems
aid o
express
edantic
deas2o;
he
nterpreter
ho
classes ullhehah s
completely
uslimets orth
oems rimming
with eferenceso slamic
ore.21
Making
Categories
Work
The
wide
ange
f
ategorizations
f
Bullhe
hah'sworldviewnd
religious
dentity
from
aw-abiding
uslim o Vedantic
ystic
-
shows
ll too
learly
he
ifficulty
n
placing
im n
any
articu-
lar
ategory
hat ll
his
nterpreters
ill
find
cceptable.
n
part,
he
range
f
categorizations
s a functionfthe
varying
nitial
nterpre-
tivemoves
iscussedbove
the
mutually
ependent
elationf
his ife ndpoetry.utthesemultipleategorizationso not xist
in
solation;
any
f
them re
presentedxplicitly
s correctiveso
other
ategorizations.
ullhe hah's
nterpreters
ill
many
ages
with
defenses
f
the
particularategories
hat
hey
ave
hosen,
nd
ri-
tiques
f
he
ositions
f
therditorsnd
nterpreters.
any
ditions
begin
with
ritiques
fother
ditionsfBullhe
hah's
oems.22
a-
makrishna's
ortrayal
f
Bullhe hah
s
the
uintessential
dvaita
20
See,
for
xample, amakrishna,
p.
54-61.
21
In
some
nstances,
he
very
ame
poem
s
used
to
illustrate oth
positions.
Forexamples fthis, ee Rinehart,Interpretationsf thePoetry fBullheShah,"
pp.
53-57.
22
See,
for
xample,
aqir's
ntroduction,
specially p.
12-13;
Ahmad,
p.
6-12;
Ramakrishna,
p.
69-71.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 16/36
ThePortable ullhe hah 67
Vedantin eceives
he
sharpest
riticism,
articularly
n
works
ub-
lished
n Pakistan.23
The esultsthat
great
eal
f
nk as een
pilledefending
ari-
ous ssessmentsf
Bullhe
hah,
ithittle
uestioning
bout hether
themeans
f ssessmenthemselvesre alid. ullhe
hah,
owever
styledy
his
nterpreters,
imply
oesnot
it
eatly
nto
ny
f he
basic
ategories
hat ll
his
nterpreters
ssume,
hethernerelies
on a
poorly
dited
rinted
dition,
r ranscribeshe
oems
s
they
are
ung y
performers,
r
uses he est ritical
ditions
vailable,
uses
ust
few
oems,
r
many.
s a
result,
substantial
ortion
f
the iteraturenBullhehahs devotedot o he oetrytself,ut o
makinglausible
he ariousabels hat ave een
roposed
or
im.
Those ho
ortray
ullhehah s
drawing
is
nspirationolely
rom
the slamic
ystical
radition
and
ertainly
ot
rom
indu
mysti-
cism)
must
efendhis
tance
y
xplaining
ny
oems
if
hey
ccept
thems
"authentic")
hich
uggest
therwise,
nd
hey
ustlso
r-
gue
gainst
hose
ho
ortray
ullhehah
n
other
ays.
hose
ho
argue
hathe ulk
f
Bullhe
hah's
nspiration
ame romutsides-
lammusthow
hyhey
elieve
his
obe
o,
nd
must
emonstrate
whatmakes im "Vedanticufi."t s worth
oting
hat
espite
he
ubiquitous
seof
ategorization
s a
primary
eans
f
nterpreting
Bullhe hah's ork,one fhis nterpretersverctuallyelineates
ordefineshe
ategories
hat
heymploy.
nstead,
hey
resent
he
categories
s
self-evident,
nd hen
onstructccountsf
how ullhe
Shah ame o
fit
nto
articularategories.
Themost
ommon
trategy
n
hese
ccounts
s to
contruct
uasi-
historical
arrativesbout
he
evelopment
f
ufism
n
the
unjab.
Interpreters
ho
tyle
ullhe hah Muslim
uggest
hat he n-
tecedentsfhis
hought
re
o
be found
nly
withinhe
ufi radi-
tion.
hemost etailedersion
f his
rgument
s foundnKhan's
Akhidullhe
Shdh.
han
egins
ith
discussion
f he
edas,
p-
anishads,
nd
ankara's
dvaita
edanta,
nd
rgues
hat
hilehere
23
See,
for
xample,
rilochan
ingh,
.
430; Rafat,
p.
2,
8,
223-224;
Khan,
p.
40;
Sayyad,p.
40;
and for
n
especially
iting ritique,
hmad's ntroduction.
Kohli,
p.
55,
quibbles
with
omeof Ramakrishna's
nterpretations
s
well.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 17/36
68 RobinRinehart
may
e
superficial
imilaritiesetween
ankara's
deas nd hose f
Bullhe
hah's,
t would
imply
e a
mistakeo assume
ome
direct
connection.
ullhe
hah's
eal
nspiration,
e
argues,
s
ibn-'Arabi's
theory
fthe
nity
f
being,
r
wahdat
l-wujald.
han
resents
o
specific
istoricalvidenceo
substantiate
his
laim;
his
rhetorical
strategy,
owever,
s to make
historically
lausible
henotion hat
Bullhe hah's deascould
have
ogically
ome
only
rom heSufi
tradition.24
In
contrast,
nterpreterslacing
ullhe
hah
n
Hindu
ramework
argue
hat ufismtself as its roots
n
ancientndian
hilosophy,
and/or
hat
he
unjabi
ufis eremore
rofoundly
nfluenced
y
heir
"Indian"
i.e.
Hindu)
nvironmenthan he ufi
radition
tself.
harda
presents
hemost etailed ersionf
his
osition.
e
boldly
sserts
that the
eclaration
f elf-deification
y
Abu
Yazid,
he
isciple
f
Abu
Ali
ofSind ndMansur
l-Hallaj
swithoutdoubt
borrowing
from
ndian
edanta."25
e further
rgues
hat
espite
laims hat
bn-
'Arabi's deas
reachedndia
n the
hirteenth
entury,
ny
imilarly
pantheistic
a
term
e
uses
quite
oosely)
deasfoundn the
unjab
through
he eventeeth
entury
ere
nspiredy
Vaisnava edanta,
the nfluencef whichwas
so
great
hat onverts
o
Islam
began
reconvertingo Hinduism.26harda lso draws ague onnections
between
ufism
nd heBuddhistndNdth raditions
f ndia. he
gist
f
he
rgument
s that
nything
oteworthy
n
Punjabi
ufisms
due
only
o ts
ndian
i.e.
non-Islamic)
ntecedents.
The
reation
f
hybrid
ategories
uch
s
Sharda's
Vaisnava
edan-
ta"
presents
pecial
roblems
or
nterpreters.
he
arger
ategories
f
Islam ndHinduismre
generallyecognized
nd
ccepted
eansf
classification,
espite
heir rawbacks.
erms
uch
s
"Vedantic
ufi,"
however,
renot n common
sage
either
n
scholarly
r
popular
works,
nd
require
ore
xplanation.
nterestingly,
nterpreters
ho
make se
of
even hese
ybrid
ategories,
hose
meaning
s
by
no
24
Khan,
pp.
17-53.
25
Sharda,
ufi
Thought,
.
70.
26
Sharda,
ufi
Thought,
p.
77,
181-183.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 18/36
The Portable ullhe hah 69
means
elf-evident,
o not
define r defend he
ategories
hemselves.
Instead,
hese
nterpretersgain
turn o
quasi-historical
xplanations
of
how
Bullhe
Shahcame to
adopt
he tance
f
the Vedantic ufi."
The
assumption
s that
Bullhe
Shah
began
his life
planted
irmly
within he
category
f
Islam,
and
then
gradually
dopted
lements
from he
ategory
f Hinduism. he
categories
re aken s
prima a-
cie;
thus
veryoneogically egins
ife
ituated ithin
ne or
another.
The
implication
s that
ategorical verlapping
uch as that
rgued
for nBullhe Shah's case is unusual nd
requires xplanation;
here
is
no sense hat
he
ategories
hemselves
ight
e
inadequate
or
he
interpretive
ask
or
even hat
person
might
rom
he
very
eginning
exhibit
categorical verlapping").
Such
interpretations
re most
frequently
xplained
hrough
he
mechanism f influence Bullhe Shah was "influenced"
y
the
Indian
outlook,
y
Vedanta,
y
Vaisnavism.
he
concept
f influ-
ence,however,
s
highly roblematic.
irst f
all,
how do we define
influence?27
s
someone
who
s
influencedwareof
having
een n-
fluenced? oes influence
lways
have a
positive
ffect? ow
do
we
establish hat nfluence as occurred?n the tudies
f
Bullhe
Shah,
the criterioneems
to
be
nothing
more
han
n
apparent
imilarity
between conceptnhispoetrynd na separatelyonceived radi-
tion,
with o need to establish
ausality.
he
concept
f nfluences
employed
n
these
nalyses
epends pon
the
presupposition
f
the
validity
f
the
categories
nvoked,
or
t is these bstract
ategories
("Indian
outlook," Vedanta,"
tc.)
to
which he
nterpretersssign
27
The
concept
f influence
as
been the
subject
f much
nalysis
nd debate
within
iterary
riticism;
he
problematic
spects
of
defining
nd
invoking
nflu-
ence are well-attested.
he
analyses
f
Bullhe Shah, however,
make no
reference
to thisvast iterature.
wo useful ntroductionso the
use
of
the
concept
f
"in-
fluence"
n
literary
riticismre
Jay
Clayton
nd Eric
Rothstein,
Figures
n the
Corpus:
Theories f Influencend
Intertextuality"
n
Clayton
nd
Rothstein,
ds.,
Influencend ntertextualitynLiterary istoryMadison:Universityf Wisconsin
Press,
1991),
pp.
3-36,
and Louis A.
Renza,
"Influence"
n
FrankLentricchiand
Thomas
McLaughlin,
ds.,
Critical erms
or Literary
tudies
Chicago: University
of
Chicago
Press,
1990),
pp.
186-202.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 19/36
70
Robin
Rinehart
the
gency
f
nfluence,
ather
han
o a more oncrete
ntity
uch s
a
particular
erson,
roup,
ext,
r
even
Zeitgeist
which,
while
till
problematic,
ould e
more
lausible,
efensible
gents
f
nfluence).
The same
questions
old true
or ther
mechanisms
urported
o
be at workn
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry,
uch s
borrowing
nd
blending
-
the
dea thatBullhe Shah borrowed
omething
rom
edanta,
r
blended ertain
spects
fSufismwith ertain
spects
f
Vedanta.
n-
fluence,
orrowing,
nd
blending
ll
presuppose
t
east wo
eparate,
distinct raditions Islam borrows
romHinduism
r,
more
arely,
vice versa.But
how
can
we
establish
what Hinduism"
nd
"Islam"
werefor he
person llegedly
oing
he
borrowing?
e can't venbe
surewhat Hinduism" nd "Islam"
and
Vedanta,
aisnava
Vedanta,
orthodox
slam,
etc.)
mean to
the
authorswho
make
such
claims
aboutBullhe
Shah,
incenoneofthem ellsus how
they
nderstand
these erms. ot
only
re these
oncepts resented
ith
ittle
r
no
supporting
vidence,
ut heir
workings
re
apparently
rbitrary.
n-
fluence,
or
xample,
eems
o
work
nly
n
one direction.
rom he
perspective
f thosewho define
ullhe
Shah
as
a
Vedantin
f
some
variety,
slam was
clearly ubject
o
nfluencerom induism.
slam,
however,
as
not
n
anyway
nfluenced
induism;
induisms inher-
ently
uperior
o Islam.
nfluence
nly
flows"
ownward;
eligious
traditions
nly
borrow"
hings
which
hey
re
acking.
hese
analy-
ses
which se
concepts
uch
s
influencend
borrowing
re
generally
made
ong
after
he
alleged
nfluence r
borrowing
ook
place,
and
those
who ssert
hem
arely
rovide
ny
pecific
vidence
o
support
their laims.
nstead,
uch
rguments
ecome he
basis
for
doctrinal
claims aboutBullhe Shahwhich n fact ell us farmore
bout
the
interpreters'
wn doctrinal
tances
han
BullheShah's.
It
is in
interpretations
f
Bullhe
Shah built
upon
nfluence,
or-
rowing,
nd
blending
hat
we
find
rguments
or
Bullhe Shah hav-
ing passed through
series
f
developmentalhases, ulminating
n
"Vedantic ufism"
r
"Vaisnava
Vedantic
ufism."
he
argument
or
developmentalhases
s a
particularlyngenious
actic
or
dealing
with he
Bullhe
Shah
corpus,
or
ny
seeming
hilosophical
ncon-
gruitiesmay
be
explained
s
expressions
rom ifferent
hases
of
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 20/36
ThePortable ullheShah 71
Bullhe
Shah's
ife.The best
xample
f
this
trategy
s
Lajwanti
Ra-
makrishna's
resentation
f the hree
hases
of
Bullhe
Shah's
mystic
life.
n the first
hase,
he
learned
asic Sufidoctrines rom
nayat
Shah,
nd
composed
erse hat
was "weak
n
thought
nd
very
om-
monplace."
n
the
second
phase,
he
"assimilated
more
f
the
ndian
outlook,"
hich ncluded
cceptance
f some
Vaisnava
deas,
nd
fi-
nally
reached he
third nd
final
hase,
n
whichhe
became
"firm
believern Advaita."28
strength
f such n
interpretive
ove s that
it does notdemand
omplete
onsistency
f
Bullhe
Shah
throughout
his
life;
ts
greatest
eakness, owever,
s
that here s
no
evidence
other
han
he
poems
themselves
or
ssuming
seriesof
develop-
mental
hases.
Thus
any
uchconstruction
s
arbitrary
n a
number
of
counts,
or he
nterpreter
ust ssume
hat here s indeed sin-
gle,
historical
igure,
ith
relatively
ixed
ody
of
work,
nd that
internalriterialone are sufficient
or
dentifying
uccessive
hases.
Yet
even
f
we
accept
hat
here s a fixed
ody
of
poetry omposed
by
one
Bullhe
Shah,
nd that
his
poetrymay
be
organized
nto
dif-
ferent
roups
n
the
basis of theworldview
xpressed
n
the
poetry,
we have
no means
f
determining
ow to
place
these
groups.
Interpreters
ho
place
Bullhe
Shah
squarely
within
he
category
of
Islam
as
it
is
variouslyonceived)
o
so
in
part
s a
response,
oftentimes
ery xplicit,
othose
who
ee
Bullhe
hah
s
having
een
influenced
n
some
wayby
ome
form f Hinduism.
n such
ccounts,
Lajwanti
Ramakrishna
s
singled
ut
for
articular
riticism. ercrit-
ics' basic
strategy
s to use the same
argumentative
tructure,
ut
throughdducing ontrasting
vidence. ullhe Shah
may
well have
passed
hroughhases,
hey rgue,
ut
learly
heultimate
hase
was
one
in whichhe
espoused "pure"
slam free
rom
xtra-categorical
influences.
r,
Bullhe hah
may
well havebeen
ubject
o
nfluences,
but ll these
nfluencesame
from
within he
slamic radition
tself,
and not
from
nywhere
lse. This
strategy
nvolves
rguments
or
influence hich re ust as problematics thosedescribed bove,
except
hat n these
rguments,
pparent
imilaritiesetween deas
28
Ramakrishna,
p.
49-54.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 21/36
72 RobinRinehart
found
n
Bullhe
hah's
oems,
nd deas ound
nywhere
n
the ufi
tradition,
hether
ullhe
hah
ould
lausibly
ave
had
ny
knowl-
edge
f hem r
not,
re ited s the truenfluences"
nhis
hinking.
Again,
here
re
weeping
istorical
laims;
ather
han he
nfluence
of
Vedanta,owever,
hese
nterpreters
nvokehe
widespread
nflu-
ence
f
bn-'Arabi's
heory
fthe
nity
f
being
wahdat
l-wujad].
Here nce
gain
we earnmore bout
he
tance f he
nterpreter
han
we do about
ullhe
hah;
he
nterpreter's
nergy
as
been
xpended
largely
pon
making
hese
ategorical
lassificationsork.
At his
oint,
ome
might
e
tempted
o
dismiss
he
multiple
nter-
pretations
fBullhe hah s thework f cholars hoseommunalr
nationalist
gendas
ave bscured
rinciples
f sound
istorical
nd
literary
nterpretation,
nd
earch
ormore
objective"
tudies.
ut t
is
especiallymportant
o
note hat his
tyle
f
nterpretationerme-
ates
irtually
verything
rittenbout ullhe
hah,
ven
n
tudies
y
scholars
ho
resumably
renot
rimarily
oncernedith
particu-
lar ommunal
r
nationalist
rogram.
irst f
ll,
he
rimary
ource
of Bullhe hah's
poetry
s in the
very
ditions
fhis
poetry
hich
place
him nto ifferent
ategories
n the asis f
varying
ommunal
agendas,
nd t s
very
ard o
gnore
he
disparate
nterpretations.
But
t
deeperevel,
ven hose
nterpreters
ho
hallenge
hemerit
ofthese
nalyses
fBullhe
hah
do not
uestion
he
very
ature
f
the
tudy
tself
they
make he amekinds
f claims bout
ate-
gories, sing
oncepts
uch s
influence,
tc. and
present
nalyses
which re
grounded
n
the
ery
ame
ssumptions
bout he elation-
ship
etween
iography
nd
poetry,
eligiousdentity,
nd
uthorship,
albeitwith
ess communal
yperbole.
nnemarie
chimmel,
or
x-
ample,
s
keenly
ware f he iases tworkn studiesf ndian ufi
poets:
"... a number
f
authors,
articularly
he Hindus... believe
that ere ndian dvaita
mysticismained
complete
ictory
ver s-
lamic
monotheism."29
ointing
ut he
endency
mong
oth
indus
andWesterncholarsfSufismo eesimilaritiesetweenankara's
Advaita
edanta
nd
bn-'Arabi's
ahdat
l-wujiid,
he
asserts,
it
29
Schimmel,
ystical
imensions
f
slam,
pp.
386-387.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 22/36
ThePortable ullheShah 73
is
notcorrect o
equate
the two
systems."30
hile
maintaining
hat
therewere ndeed Hindu nfluences"
n
the
mystical
oets
of
the
Punjab
nd
Sindh,
er onclusion
s that his iteratures
"unmistak-
ably
slamic"becauseof tsveneration
f
Muhammad.31
hus
while
her
discussion f the
Punjabi
Sufis
s
considerably
more
nuanced
than hat
f
many
nterpreters32,
he still ituates
er
nalysis
within
the
basic
problematic
rameworkf
categories
nd themechanisms
by
which
hey
nteract,
uch s
influence.
imilarly,
ustansir
Mir,
in a
brief
tudy
f Bullhe
Shahand Sultan
Bahu,
while
noting
he
broad-based
ppeal
of
Bullhe
Shah, rgues
hat
othBullheShah nd
SultanBahu are
"situated
irmly
ithin
he slamic
tradition,
nd t
is
a mistake
o think hat
hey
were nfluenced
y
theHindu
Vedantic
tradition."33
hile
virtually
nyone
an
appreciate
ome
aspects
of
this
poetry,
ir
argues,
n
the
nd,
t
s
"decidedly
slamic
n
struc-
ture
nd
detail."34
oth Schimmel nd Mir
acknowlege
he
multiple
interpretations
f
Bullhe
Shah,
dismiss ather
bruptly
he
laims
for
significant
Hindu nfluence"n
his
poetry,
ndconclude
y
ituating
him
within
slam,
without
ndicating
hat he riteria
or
etermining
the
Hinduor slamic
ontent
f his
poetry
were.
We arethus eftwith
arying
odies
of
work ttributedo
a man
namedBullheShah, ndwecannot e certainwhetherll thepoems
credited o
him
are
actually
he
composition
f a
single
historical
figure.
et while
virtuallyveryone
who
writes bout Bullhe Shah
notes
he
ifficulties
nherent
n
the
Bullhe
hah
corpus,
heir
nalyses
of his work onetheless
enerally roceed
n the
ssumption
hatwe
are
in
fact
dealing
with ne
single
uthor.
t is
here
that
we
need
30
Schimmel,
Reflections
n
Popular
Muslim
Poetry,"
.
23.
31
Schimmel,
The
nfluencef Sufism n Indo-Muslim
oetry,"
p.
197-200.
32
Schimmel's
tudy
f slamic
mystical
oetry
n
vernacular
anguages
rovides
a wealth f detail
on
the
ypes
f
poetry
which
may
ndeed
have
played
role n
shaping
ullheShah
the
historical
igure
s
a
poet;
his
s informationotfound n
othertudies fBullheShah. See especially hapter ofSchimmel's s Through
Veil.
33
Mir,
Teachings
fTwo
Punjabi
ufi
Poets,"
p.
520-521.
34
Mir,
.
521.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 23/36
74
RobinRinehart
to
examine
more
ritically
he
onceptions
f
authorship
hat
re
t
work
n
studiesf
Bullhe
hah.
The
mplications
f
the
Concept
f
Authorship
The
varying
nterpretations
f
Bullhe
hah,
s I
have
described
above,
ely
pon
series f
unquestioned
resuppositions
nd
ues-
tionable
rgumentative
trategies.
t he
eartf ach
f
hese
trate-
gies
ies the
uncritical
ssumption
hat
he
rue
ubject
f
this nal-
ysis
s a
man
named
ullhe
hah.
These
nterpreters
cknowledge
thathereremultiplenterpretationsfBullhe hah'sife ndwork,
but eem
o assume
hat
herean
only
e
one
rue
ne.
The
key
o
finding
he
real"
ullhe
hah
midsthe
ariously
onstructed
re-
tenderss
to
define
ullhe
hah
he
man.f
nterpreters
an
stablish
exactly
hen e
lived,
what
he
learned,
nd
exactly
hich
oems
he
composed,
hen
he
rue,
lear
icture
f
his
ife nd
work
will
emerge.
This
trategyepends
pon
n
mplicit
oncept
f
authorship,
c-
cording
owhich
he
uthor
sa
single
ndividual
ocated
n
specific
time
nd
place.
As
such,
e is
subject
o
forces uch
s
the
ocial
and
historical
onditions
nderstoodo
be in
operation
uring
is
lifetime,nd s exposedoa rangefreligiousptionsonceiveds
being
onfined
ithin
pecific
ategories.
hese
actors
ead to
the
author
evelopingparticular
dentity
nd
worldview,
hich
e
then
expresses
n
his
work.
nce
nterpreters
ave
dentifiedhis
dentity
and
worldview,
t
functions
s a
standard
f
onsistency
y
which
hey
can
udge
ny
works
ttributed
o the
uthor
amed
ullhe
hah.
This
mplicit
tandard
f
uthorship
xemplifies
particular
orm
f
what
Michel
oucault
ermed
he
author-function,"
functionound
in
literary
nalysis
n
which
he
oncept
f
authorship
ecomes
means
f
nterpreting
set of
texts
and
may
lso
be a
means
f
authentification,
nd
herefore
imitation).
Theauthorxplains hepresence fcertainventswithin text,s wellas their
transformations,
istortions,
nd
their
arious
modifications
and
this
hrough
n
author's
iography
r
by
reference
ohis
particular
oint
f
view,
n
the
nalysis
of
his
social
preferences
nd
his
positions
within
class...)
The
author
lso
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 24/36
ThePortable ullhe hah 75
constitutes
principle
f
unity
n
writing
here
ny
unevenness
f
production
is ascribed o
changes
aused
by
evolution, aturation,
r outside nfluence.35
This
conception
f
authorshiplearly epends pon single,
ixed
historical
igure
hose ife
nd
predilections ay
be seen
as
deter-
mining
he content
f his
work;
his
figure
s furthereen as
being
either
onsistent,
r
subject
o
a
process
f
ntellectual
evelopment
whichwillbe manifested
n
the
ody
fhiswork.
oucault
oted hat
the
oots
fthis
onception
f
uthorship
ie
n Christian
xegesis
nd
the
ttempt
o authenticater
reject
exts
ttributed
o
a
single
uthor.
Ofparticularnterestrethecriteria or uthenticitystablishedy
St.
Jerome,
ccording
o which
body
of work
ould
be
considered
that
f one author
f
t
reflected
a)
a
standard
f
quality
an
author's
workswillbe ofuniform
uality),
b)
a
field f
conceptual
r theoret-
ical coherence
the
uthor
ill
always
dhere
o
the
ame theoretical
positions),
nd
(c)
stylistic
niformity
there
will
be
no
significant
variation
n
the author's
tyle).
The authorwas thus
onstructeds
a definite istorical
igure
n
whom seriesof events
onverged.36
A
similar
rocess
s
clearly
t work
n
constructions
f Bullhe
Shah
as
author,
nd BullheShah's
nterpreters
nvoke riteriaf
authentic-
ity
that re
remarkably
imilar o
those et out
by
St.
Jerome. he
varyingnterpretationsf Bullhe Shah as a definite istoricaligure
become hebasis for
multiple
laims bout
he
true
i.e.
doctrinally
correct)
ature
f
his
poetry,
ach
rooted
n
some
conception
f an
ideal,
dominant
ategory,
e it "Islam"
or "Vedantic ufism."
This
concept
f
authorship
hichBullheShah's
nterpreters
pply
has itsroots
n
eighteenth-century
estern
nderstandings
f
printed
matter,
hen
exts
ame
to be
regarded
s intellectual
roperty,
heir
authors
aving
ertain
ights
ut also
responsibilities.
o
apply
he
concept
f
legal responsibility
o the
content
f a text f
course
re-
quires
he
oncept
f
an
author s a
clearly
dentifiable,
pecific
ndi-
35
Foucault,Michel, What s anAuthor?"nHazardAdams ndLeroy earles,
eds.,
Critical
heory
ince
1965
Tallahassee:
lorida
tate
University
ress,
1986),
p.
134.
36
Foucault,
What
s
an
Author?"
.
144.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 25/36
76 RobinRinehart
vidual,
s well
n
understanding
f
he exttself
s a
fixed
bject.
et
the
ature
f he
ullhe
hah
orpus
makes his
otionf
uthorship
highlyroblematic.
For
example,
f
nterpreters
re to
apply particular
tandard
f
"quality"
ow s that tandard
etermined?ould standard
evel
refer
o
expressions
f
particularhilosophicalositions,
r
formal
patterns
nthe
poetry?
eneed
only
ecall hevariousriterian-
voked n
different
ditions,
uch
s
"force nd
implicity,"
isregard
for
meter,
r
metrical
onsistency,
o
ee
the
ifficulty
ith
efining
standardor
ullhe hah's
oetry.
urther,
s
trealistico
ssume
hat
Bullhe hah's oemswere llofthe ameevel fquality?ouldn't
some
f
his
poems
e
betterhan thers?
ven fwe
eave side
he
question
f
developmental
hases
s.
completeniformity
n
Bullhe
Shah's
doctrine,
ust
we
assume hat
ullhe
hahwas
completely
consistent
hroughout
is
ife,
hat e
never
xperimented
ith iffer-
ent
deas
n
his
poetry,
r
varied is forms
f
expression
epending
upon
is udience?
he
ssumption
hat heres
a
recoverable
ody
of
poetry
omposed
y
consistent,
tylisticallynchanging,
octri-
nally
ixed istorical
igure
amed
ullhe
hah
s
problematic,
nd
yet
t
s
upon
his
ssumption
hat onstructionsf Bullhe
hah
he
author
epend.
urther,
hese onstructionsf
Bullhe
hah
s
author,
made
ong
fter hefact,re nonetheless
ositioned
s
prior
in
other
ords,
he
particular
onstruction
tself ecomes means f
explanation
nd
nterpretation.
This onstructionf
Bullhe
hah
s historical
uthor
s
especially
important
or
ssigning
im
specific
ommunal
dentity,
hether
it
be orthodox
uslim,
ebellious
ufi,
r
Vedantic
ufi.
n
eachof
these
haracterizations,
ullhe hah
s
portrayed
s
a man
haped
y
specific
istoricalactorsn his
mmediate
nvironment.
hat
ullhe
Shah ived n
he
resence
f
religious
raditions
hat renow
abelled
"Islam" nd
Hinduism"
however
uch
raditions
ay
e
defined)
s
a
reasonable
ssumption.
ut
were hese
meaningfulategories
o
Bullhe hah?Howcanweestablish hat e knew bout
hem,
ow
people
hen
nderstood
hem,
hat e
thought
bout ach?
o
answer
such
uestions,
e
are ed
back
n
a circle o
his
worktself work
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 26/36
ThePortable ullhe hah 77
which,
s
nearly
ll
concede,
annot e
conclusively
stablisheds
the
roduct
f
this ne
historical
igure.
nd
yet
what ll thosewho
define
particular
ullhe
hah
do is
to
extract
assages
rom
is
poetry
o demonstratehe Hindu
nfluence"rthe
redominance
f
"orthodoxslam"
n
the ife ndwork fthis neman.
The
strategiesnterpreters
ave
ypically
sed eaveus with on-
flicting
ortrayals
f Bullhe
hah's
ife
ndwork. et
the
very
x-
istencef so
many
ortrayals
akes lear
ullhe
hah's
mportance
in
Punjabi
iterature.
hy
s
he claimed
yPunjabis
f
different
e-
ligious
ommunities?hat
s at stake
when
nterpreterslace
him
within
particularategory?
t
s not
noughimply
o
dentify
he
problems
ith
he
oncept
f
authorship
r
the
onception
f Hin-
duism
nd
slam s
separate
eligious
raditionsndthenmove n
with
et
nother
nterpretation.
o
answer uch
uestions
equires
developing
ew
trategies
or
tudying
ullhe
hah,
is
poetry,
nd
his
nterpreters.
Reinterpreting
ullhe hah and His
Interpreters
What an we
earn romhe arious
onstructions
f
Bullhe hah
the uthor? hy oesheoccupyuch n mportantlace nPunjabi
religion?
o
begin
o
nswerhese
uestions,
e
must
egin
ur
tudy
ofthe
oet
ndhis
nterpreters
ith
new et f
assumptions:
a.
There re
multiple
Bullhe hahs."There s as
yet
no
widely
c-
cepted,
efinitiveccountfBullhe hah's ife.
ven f
new
ources
of nformation
ere
iscovered,
nd t
became
ossible
o
construct
a
reasonably
uthentic,
istorically
efensible
ccount f the ife
f
Bullhe
hah
s a
historical
igure,
uch n account ould
ikely
ave
little onnection
o,
r
hange,
he
arious
opular
nderstandings
f
his
ife.Whilewe
may airlyafely
ssume hat here
as
ndeed
a
historical
igure,
is
rue
iography
ay
no
onger
e
recoverable,
and t
may
o
onger
e themost
mportant
ssue.Ratherhan ontin-
uing
o
nterpret
ullhe hah
yrelyingpon
henotion f
a
single
correct
eading
f
his
ife,
t
s
more
seful
o ook
t
the
multiple
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 27/36
78 RobinRinehart
biographies
hat
lready
xist.What
o
they
ell
us aboutwhat
eo-
ple
see as
being
mportant
bout
ullhe
hah?
n
what
ways
o
the
versionsf
Bullhe
hah
differ,
nd
n
what
ways
re
they
imilar?
How do
they
ffect
hevarious ersionsf the
Bullhe hah
orpus
that xist? owdo these imilarities
nd
differences
elate ocontem-
porary
ebates bout ational
ndcommunal
dentity?
f we
accept
the
oncept
hat
ullhe
hah's eaders
nd
isteners
reate heirwn
Bullhe
hahs,
e
can
develop
new
onception
f
Bullhe
hah s an
"author"
ariously
reatedndrecreated ithin ifferentiscursive
spaces e.g.
thevarious iscussionsf
national,ommunal,
nd
re-
gional
dentity
n
contemporary
akistan
nd
ndia).
his,
n
urn,
ill
allow
us
to consider crucial
uestion:
hy
s
Bullhe
hah'sname
so
powerful?37
n
a
recent
tudy
f Sufi
ndbhakti
oetry,
homas
de
Bruijn
uggests
hatt suseful
o
consider edievalndian
oets
not
ust
s
historical
igures,
ut lsoas "rhetorical
ersonae."
n the
time etween historical
oet's
reative
ork,
nd
ts
subsequent
recording
n
manuscript
orm,
persona
evelops
hich
efers ot
only
o the
rhetorics
f the
poetry
ttributedo
the
poet,
ut lso
the
saintlymage
f he
oet
eveloped
n
popular
evotion."38
e
Bruijn's
oncept
f
the
hetorical
ersona
s a useful
ay
fconsid-
eringhe unctionnd mportancefa poet'sname s the orpusf
poetry
ttributed
othe
oet
nd he
iographical
raditionsbout he
poet xpand.
b.
Multiple
Bullhe
Shahs have
created
multiple
odies
of poetry.
Uncovering
ullhe
hah
hehistorical
igure
s
not
he
key
o un-
derstanding
ullhe
hah's ole n
Punjabi eligion.
ullhe
hah
he
beloved
oet
s in a sense work
n
progress,
nd
ccepting
his
o-
tion llows s to further
evelop
new
way
f
ooking
t
the
oetry
37
Hawley
"Author
nd
Authority")
rgues
hatnmuchmedieval ndian
oetry,
the
poet's
name
s
used not so much s
a
mark
f individual
uthorship,
ut
s a
meansof invokingheauthorityssociatedwith hepoet'sname.Ali Asani "The
Isma'ili
Gindns")
as dentified
similar
rocess
n
sma'li
ginaln
iterature,
nwhich
poems
of
apparently
elatively
ecent
rigin
re
attributed
o
much
arlier
uthors.
38
de
Bruijn, .
1.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 28/36
The Portable ullhe hah 79
attributed
o
him.
The
corpus
f
Bullhe
Shah
poetry
tself s
also
a
work n
progress,
lways haped
n
partby
the
perspective
f
those
who
present
t
through
diting
text,
hrough
eading
text,
hrough
performing
r
listening
o the
performance
f his
work).
A.K.
Ra-
manujan
dentified similar
rocess
t
work n
different
ellings
f
the
Rdamyana.
hebasic
plot,
haracters,
nd other lementsn
the
tale functions a
"pool
of
signifiers
like
a
gene
pool)."
Different
tellings
f the
tory
not
only
elate
o
prior
exts
irectly,
o
borrow
or
refute,
ut
hey
elate
o
each other
hrough
his ommon
ode or
common ool. Every uthor,fonemayhazard metaphor,ips nto
it and
brings
ut
a
unique rystallization,
new
textwith
unique
texture
nd
a fresh
ontext.""39
singRamanujan's
erms,
hen,
oth
Bullhe
Shah and the
poetry
ttributed
o him
themselves
ecome
similar ort f
pool
of
signifiers."
here re ommon
lements ithin
it,
butwhat
different
nterpreters
ake
from
his
pool,
and
the
narra-
tive
hat
hey
onstructo relate
hose
lements,
ay
differ
adically.
Nonetheless,
ach
is
aware
of
working
romwithin he
same
pool
of
material.
his
view of
the
orpus
llowsus toask
different,
nd
potentially
orefruitful
uestions.
What
kinds
f
poems
are found
in
differentditions f
Bullhe
Shah's work? s
there constant ore
setof
poems
hat
ppears
ncollections ith
ifferent
gendas?
c.
Definitionsf
Islam and Hinduismre likewise
nconstant
nd
multiformed,haped
by
the
perspective
in
both
ime
nd
space)
of
those
who
present
hem. ather
han
ocusing
n
placing
ullhe
hah
in
a
category,
e
should se
the
multiple
ersions fhis
poetic
orpus
as
a means f
understanding
ow
uch
ategories
re constructednd
used.Would
omeone
earing
r
reading
he ine "theres no
Hindu,
there s no Muslim"
n
BullheShah's
time
have
understood
t
n the
same
way
someone
might
oday?
What s at
stakewhen
nterpreters
claimthat ullhe
Shah's
true
nspiration
omesfrom
induism,
nd
not slam?
Why
s BullheShah so often sed for his
urpose?
39
Ramanujan,
ThreeHundred
dmdyaas,"p.
46.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 29/36
80 RobinRinehart
The
Role
ofPerformance
If we
accept
he
fluidity
nd
multiplicity
f
understandings
f
Bullhe hah,
is
poetry,
ndhis
udience,
e can lso sk
mportant
questions
bout he
performative
ontextf his work.Most nter-
preters
ave
reated
he
performance
f
Bullhe
hah's
poetry
s
a
source f
disruption
f he
oetic
orpus. hrougherformance,
he
hypothetical
r-text,
ure,
ound,
static
bject,
ecomes efiled
s
performers
ake
erses ut
f
ontext,
nterpolate,hange
meters,
nd
vary
yntax
nd
vocabulary
n
the
basisof their
wn
dialects.
he
writtenext s takens primarynddefinitive;erformersreak ts
boundaries,
nd
deviate
romhe rue
ext. et t
the ame
ime,
he
poetic orpus
tselfs understoodo be firstndforemostral
according
o
virtually
very
ersion
f
Bullhe
hah's
ife,
e
sang
his
poems,
nd
hey
ere
nitially
ransmitted
rally.4
Many
ditors
note
he
xistencend
mportance
f
many
s
yet
unpublished
r
unknown
ullhe
hah
poems, uggesting
hat
he
oral
radition
f
transmission
s still ital. f we considerhese actorsrom
purely
practicalerspective,
he
nderlying
ssumption
f
single,mplicit
Ur-textoesn'tmake ense.
s a useful
nalogy,
e
might
onsider
teacher's
evelopment
f
single
ectureor n
ntroductory
ourse.
The eacherrepareslecture,nddeliverst o tudents.he ecture
may
xistn
some
written
orm,
uch
s
notes,
ut
t
s
designed
obe
performed
eforen audience. he
next ime he eacher
eaches
hat
course,
he will
presumably
ake
nto
ccount numberffactors
-
students'
uestions,
heir
pparent
evel
f
comprehension,
ew
informationndnew
ircumstances,
hanges
n her wn
hinking
and
revise
he
ecture
ccordingly.
imilarly,
ven
f
we
accept
he
idea
of
Bullhe
hah
s a
single,
istorical
igure,
ho
performed
is
poems
ver
period
f
ime,
hen
t eems
easonableo ssume hat
Bullhe
hah
himself
ight
ave
revised
ndividual
oems
so
that
40
There s some debate s to whetherhehistoricaligure ullheShahactually
created
manuscripts
f his
poetry,
r
f
he neverwrote hem r had themwrittent
all.
According
o
Ramakrishna
p.
46),
therewere
original
manuscripts,
ut
fire n
thehouse of
Bullhe
Shah's descendants
estroyed
hem.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 30/36
ThePortable ullheShah 81
there ould
have been alternate ersions
n
circulationven
during
his
ife),
hat e
might
ave
expressed
ifferentdeas at different
e-
riods
n
his
ife
thus
reating body
f work hatwas not
doctrinally
consistent),
nd
that
e
might
ave
geared
his
poems
o differentu-
diences
thus
ome
might
ndeeduse "Hindu"
names
for
god,
others
include
Quranic
passages;
some
might
e
relativelyimple,
thers
philosophically
ore
ophisticated).
It
s also essential othinkbout he oleofBullhe
hah's
udience.
To a
great
xtent,
he ontinued
ower
nd
popularity
f
BullheShah
rests
upon performances
f
his work. f we return
o
the
analogy
of the teacher's
ntroductory
ecture, ere we should
magine
he
students'ecture otes.What did each
student
ake
away
from he
lecture?Whatdid
they
indmost
mportant,
ost
nteresting?
hat
did
theydisregard?
ow did
their
rior
knowledge
ffect he
way
that
hey
nderstood
or
misunderstood)
he eacher's
ecture?
very
teacher as storiesfthe
garbled
ersions fherwords hat
ppear
n
exams.And
f
we
imagine
ooking
t
notes
rom
ifferentersions f
that
ame
although
evised)
ecture ver several
years,
he
possible
variant
nterpretationsultiply.
f BullheShah
performed
is
poems
over
period
f
years, evising
nd
adding
ew
poems,
he
orpus
f
poetry
ven
during
is
ifetime
ould
nothave
fit
he
mage
hat
is
interpreters
eem to have of
t,
f twere ndeed
possible
o recover
those
original
orms.And
if
we factor
n
the furtherransmission
of his
poems
through erformance,
nd
later
hroughmanuscripts,
and
printed
exts,
he
corpus
of course would becomeevenmore
complex
as it
indeed s
in
reality.
ts
complexity
nd
apparent
inconsistencies,owever,
o
not
necessarily
ean hat ntire
ortions
of
t
are nauthenticnd thereforeo be
disregarded.
ullheShah the
performer,
hose
who
performed
is
poetry,
hose who listened o
it and read
t,
have all had
a
role
n
creating
he
corpus
f
poetry
that s now attributedo BullheShah.
f we
are to
take
BullheShah's
importance
s
a
poet eriously,
nd ask
why
he s beloved
y
different
religious
ommunities,
e should ake
seriously
ll the
poetry
hat
goes
under
his
name,
ven
f it is
possible
to establish hat
Bullhe
Shah
as
a
single
historical
igure
id not
ompose
ll of t.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 31/36
82 Robin
Rinehart
The "Portable"Bullhe hah
What o istenersnd eaders
ring
o he
xperience
f
hearing
r
reading
ullhe
hah's
oems? resumably,
ach
rings
is
rher
wn
religious
dentity
nd
religious
ensibilities.hose
whofind
ullhe
Shah's
oems
ersonally
eaningful
ost
ikely
lace
hose
oems
within
he
rameworkf heir
wn
eligiousnderstanding
Bullhe
Shah's
oems
re
hus
portable"
nto
ifferent
rameworks.
f Sikhs
find ullhe
hah's
oems
moving,erhaps
t s because
heyquate
sentiments
xpressed
n
the
poems
with
entiments
rom
heSikh
tradition,s is suggestedy henumberf rticlesomparingullhe
Shah
nd the
words
f
theSikh
gurus
n
recent
ublications
rom
the
ndian
unjab.41
f
Vedantinsre
nspired
y
ertain
ullhe hah
poems,
hen
erhaps
t
s
because
hey
ind
n
those
oems
deas hat
fit
heirwn
understanding
fVedanta. uslims
ho
espond
avor-
ably
o
Bullhe hah's
oems
fcourse an
also
fit
many
oems
nto
a
frameworkhat
uits
heir wnvisions
f slam. hese
esponses,
in
turn,
enerate
arying
enses
f
he real"
ullhe
hah,
elativeo
the
nterpretive
rameworkhe eader r
istener
rings
othe
oems.
It
s no
wonderhat herere
o
many
ifferent
nterpretations
f
he
poet.
What s
it about
is
poetry
hatmakes
his
ossible?
Inthemost amousf he oemsttributedoBullhehah,he oet
straightforwardly
xpresses
is
onging
or
od.
The
basic hemesre
the
pain
f
separation
rom
od,
dissatisfactionith
worldly,
ate-
rial
ife,
nd
he
retense
f
earning.
hese
oems,
ith
vocabulary
likely
amiliar
o most
peakers
f
Punjabi,42
xpressoncepts
hich
may
e
placed
nto ifferent
nterpretive
rameworks.ndeed
great
41
See,
for
xample,
Kala
Singh
Bedi,
"Bullhe
hdh de
Kalam
dd
Gurbdni
al
Tulndtmakdhiain" n Rattan
inghJaggi,
d.,
Khoj
Patrik4,
ain
Bullhe
hah
Ank
(Patiala:
Publication
ureau,
unjabi
University,
991),
pp.
134-150,
who
argues
or
the
profound
nfluence
f Sikh deas
on
BullheShah,
nd the
hapter
Bullhe hah
te Gurbdni"
pp.
169-182)
nBhishA
Vibhig
Punjib's
Bullhe
hdh:
Jivan
e
Racnd,
whichpoints utdifferencesetweenBullheShah's thoughtnd that f theSikh
gurus,
ut till
finds hem
worthy
f
comparison.
42
n
many
ditions
f
Bullhe
hah's
poems,
here
re
compositions
hich
nclude
a
fairly ophisticated
erso-Arabic
ocabulary,
nd
referenceso
the
Quran
s well
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 32/36
ThePortable ullheShah 83
deal of
the
ppeal
of
Bullhe
Shah's
poetrymay
ie
in
its
very
orta-
bility
the
very
factthat
t
lends tself o so
many
nterpretive
frameworks.
erhaps
most
popular
re the
poems
n whichBullhe
Shah
sings
s
Hir,
hebeautiful
oung
woman
onging
orher
true
love,
Ranjha.
The
tragic
omance f Hir and
Ranjha
s a
part
f
the
shared olklore f all
Punjabis,
nd ike
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry,
t too
exists
n
many
ifferent
ersions,
nd has been
nterpreted
n
many
different
evels,
rom
imple
ove
story
o
complex
mystical
llegory
about
he
oul's
ourney
owards
od.43
I've criedout"Ranjhi,Rinjhi " so many imes hatnow 've becomeRanjhi
myself.
Just all me Dhido
Ranjhi
don't
bother
alling
me Hir
anymore.44
In
these
ines,
BullheShah
magines
imself
s
Hir,
sserting
er
complete dentity
ith
her
beloved
Rdnjha.
ines such as
these
re
easilyportable
ntodifferent
hilosophical
rameworks. Vedantin
might
ee this
passage
as
reflecting
heunion
of
the ndividual elf
[dtman]
with he universal
eality
brahman];
t
might
voke
for
Vaisnava
he
pain
of
separation
rom
od
[viraha]
nd the
oy
of
a
possible
uture
nion;
Sufi
ersed
n
bn-'Arabi's
ritings ight
ind
ita
good expression
f
wahdat
l-wujaid,
ccording
o which
he rue
self s infact manifestationf Allah. n theworld fphilosophical
texts nd
treatises,
ne who tudied
bn-'Arabi's
heory
f
wahdat
l-
wujiid
nd ts attendant
echnical,
hilosophical
pparatusmight
ot
immediately
ee affinities
ith
he monistic
hilosophy
f Advaita
Vedanta,
r
the
pain
of
separation
rom
God
felt
by
the
Vaisnava
as Persian iterature.ut
these
o not eemto be themost
opular
f
Bullhe
Shah's
poems.
ndeed
a
potentially
seful ield or
future
tudy
wouldbe to
identify
he
poems
most
ommonly erformed
nd found n various
ditions
f
Bullhe
Shah's
poetry,
nd
to
confirm hetherhemost
popularpoems
re
in
fact hose
with
he
least
echnical,
ommunally
loaded"
vocabulary.
43
For brief ntroductiono the
Hir/RanjhA
radition,
ee
Rinehart,
Hir/Ranjhh"
inPeter laus andMargaret ills, ds.,BibliographyfSouthAsian FolkloreGar-
land
Press,
orthcoming).
44
Punjabi
from
uther,
.
102. For other ersions f this
oem,
ee
Atam
ingh,
pp.
108-9,
nd
Ramakrishna,
.
63.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 33/36
84
RobinRinehart
devotee. t hat
evel,
ach raditionas ts wn
history
nd ense f
identity,
ts
wn
ocabulary,
ts
wn
diosyncrasies
nd
particularities.
Yet
reader
r
isteneramiliar ith he
asic
deasof
any
f
these
traditionsould
ertainly
ind
ffinitiesetween
hem nd
many
f
the
asic entiments
xpressed
n
Bullhe
hah's
oetry.
hus
many
f
the deas
most
ommonlyxpressed
nthe
oetry
ttributedo
Bullhe
Shah
re
n
fact
portable"
nto ifferent
eligious
nd
philosophical
frameworks,
reating
vast
potential
udience.
s
a
result,
hose
who dmire im ave
ought
oclaim is s
a
champion
f
heir
wn
particular
orldview.
n
so
doing, hey
ontinually
ashionew nd
often
onflicting
ullhe hahs.
Conclusions
Bullhe
hah s
clearly
n
mportant
igure
n the
eligious
evel-
opment
n
the
Punjab,
oth
s
a
poet
n
his own
right,
nd
as
an
example
f
how
nterpreters
ave
ought
o
understand
hat evel-
opment. espite
he
wide-ranging
nd
conflicting
nterpretations
f
his ife nd
work,
early
ll
share
he ame
nderlyingethodolog-
ical framework.his
framework,
ithts
unquestionedssumptions
about
iography,
extual
orpus,
eligious
ategorization,
nd uthor-
ship, asdictatedhe indsf uestionshateople ave skedbout
Bullhe
hah,
nd he
nswers
hat
hey
ave
rovided.
et he
many
answers
bout
who
Bullhe
hah
was,
what e
composed,
ndhow
he ived is
ife,
eaveus
with
seeminglyewilderingrray
f on-
flicting
ortrayals.
As an
lternative,
ecan
pproach
he
oet's
ife nd
work
ith
he
understanding
hat
we
willfind
multiple
ullhe hahs,
nd
multiple
versions
f
his
poetic
orpus,
ach
constructed
ith
lementsrom
the
ame
pool
of
signifiers,"
ut arriedntodifferentiscursive
spaces.
his
rovides
s
not
nly
with
way
f
dealing
ith
xisting
divergentnterpretations,
ut
lso
of
sking
ew,
nd
potentially
ore
meaningful
uestions
bout isrole n
Punjabi eligions.
ftherere
indeed
multiple
ullhe
hahs,
henwe
can ask
what
xactly
ach
is
like,
ndwhich
roups
e
represents.
f therere
multiple
odies
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 34/36
ThePortable ullhe hah 85
of
poetry,
e can both escribend
compare
hem. ow do
they
differ? hat o
they
ave n
common
what
xactly
s in the
"pool
f
ignifiers?"
e
might
iscover
hat heres
a
common
hread
of
expressionunninghrough
he
many
ditionsf
Bullhe
hah's
work,
nd
gain
new
nsight
nto
hared
spects
f
Punjabi eligious
experience.
o
suggest
hatherere
multiple
ullhe hahs
oesnot
mean
hat
we must
eject
ntirely
he
oncept
f
a
single
erson,
but ather
hat
n
order o understand
ullhe
hah's
mportance,
e
must eorientur
pproach
o
the
many ays
nwhich
his
igure
as
been
emembered.fter
ll,
Bullhe hah's
nterpreters
ssume
hat
they
re lltalkingbout he ame
erson
the isagreementies n
their
nterpretation
fwho hat
erson
as,
nd
what ind f
poetry
he
composed.
Thenotionf
multiple
ullhe hahs ould
llow
ur tudieso ake
on
a
historical
imensions
well.
How
have
nterpretations
fBullhe
Shah
hanged
ver
ime
e.g. olonial/post-colonial)?
hat
oes his
tell
us
about he
ngoing
evelopment
f
the
elf-understanding
f
different
eligious
ommunities
n
the
unjab,
s well s
their
ela-
tionships
ith ne
nother?
historically
ensitive
ritique
f
Bullhe
Shah's
nterpreters
ould
lso
allow
s
to
develop
ewmeans
f
cat-
egorization
or
is
work nd hework f
other
oets.
uch
ategories
would
give
us new
ways
of
viewingeligious
elief nd
practice
in
the
unjab.
here ould
e
great
alue
n
studying
ow Bullhe
Shah's"
ife
nd
work
avebeen
onstantlyeshaped
nd
renewed,
and what
hese
eformulationsellus about hosewho
continue
o
create
hem.
Department
f
Religion
ROBINRINEHART
Lafayette
ollege
Easton,
A
18042,
SA
REFERENCES
Ahmad,
ayyad
Nazir,
d.
1976.
Kalam-e-Bullhe
hah.
Lahore:
Packages
Limited.
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 35/36
Asani,
Ali
S. 1996. "The
sma'ili
Gindns: eflectionsn
Authority
nd
Authorship"
in
Farhad
Daftary,
d.,
Medieval
sma'ili
History
nd
Thought
Cambridge:
Cambridge
niversity
ress),
p.
265-280.
Bedi,
Kala
Singh
1987.
Bullhe
hdh:
locndtmak
dhiain. atiala:Publications u-
reau,
PunjabiUniversity.
Bhasha
Vibhag anjab
1970.
Bullhe
hah:
Jivan e
Racnd.
Patiala:Bhasha
Vibhag.
Bhatti,
Abdul
Majid
1987.
Kafidn
Bullhe
Shah.
Islamabad:Lok
Virsa
Publishing
House.
de
Bruijn,
homas
1997. "Visions
of the
Unseen,
Rhetorical
trategies
n Bhakti
andSufi
Poetry." aperpresented
o
the
Seventh
nternationalonferencen
Early
Literature
n
New
ndo-Aryananguages,
Venice,
taly,August
997.
Faqir,Muhammadaqir1960.Kulliyat-e-Bullhehah.Lahore: unjabiAdabAcademy.
Foucault,
Michel
1986.
"What
s an
Author?"
n HazardAdams and
Leroy
earle,
eds.,
Critical
heory
ince
1965
(Tallahassee:
lorida
tate
University
ress),
pp.
137-148.
Johann
iick
1940.
"Die Sufische
ichtung
n
der
Landesspraches
es
Panjab,"
Oni-
entalische
iteraturzeitung,
3, 1,
pp.
1-11.
Hawley,
J.S. 1988.
"Author nd
Authority
n
the Bhakti
Poetry
f North
ndia,"
Journal
f
Asian
Studies, 7,
2,
pp.
269-290.
Kaur,
Mahindar
967.
Asli
temukammal
Kafian
ullhe
hah
Jivan e
BhumikM
amet.
Amritsar: hai
Mehar
ingh
nd Sons.
Khan,
Muhammad
saf.
1992.
Akhid ullhe hah. Lahore:Pakistan
unjabi
Adabi
Board.
Kohli,
Surindar
ingh
1987.Bullhe hah.
New Delhi:
Sahitya
Akademi.
Luther, . Rauf1982. "Versifiedranslationf Kafees" n C.F. Usborne, .K. La-
jwanti,
A.
Rauf
Luther,
ullah
Shah:
Mystic
Poet
of Punjab.
(Lahore:
Sh. Mubarak
Ali),
pp.
69-159.
Matringe,
enis 1988.
"Krsnaite
nd NAth lementsnthe
Poetry
f
the
ighteenth-
centuryanjabi
ilfiBullhe
Ah"
in
R.S.
McGregor,
d.,
Devotional iterature
in
SouthAsia: Current
esearch,
985-1988.
Cambridge:
ambridge
niver-
sity
ress),
p.
190-206.
Mir,
Mustansir 995.
"Teachings
f Two
Punjabi
ufiPoets"
n
Donald S.
Lopez,
Jr., d.,
Religions f
ndia
n
Practice.
Princeton:
rinceton
niversity
ress),
pp.
518-529.
Padam,
Piara
Singh.
1968.
Sain
Bullhe
hah.
Patiala:
Sardar
ahitBhavan.
Puri,
J.R
and
T.R.
Shangari
986. Bulleh
Shah:
The
Love-Intoxicatedconoclast.
Amritsar: adha Soami
Satsang
Beas.
Rafat, aufiq 982.BullehShah:A Selection enderedntoEnglishVerse. ahore:
Vanguard
ublications.
Ramakrishna,
ajwanti
1938.
Panjabi
Sufi
Poets
A.D. 1460-1900.
London:
Oxford
University
ress.
86
RobinRinehart
This content downloaded from 129.2.19.102 on Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:50:31 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
7/24/2019 Bulleh Shah 3
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/bulleh-shah-3 36/36
The Portable ullheShah 87
Ramanujan,
A.K.
1994.
"Three
Hundred
Rdmamyanas:
ive
Examples
and
Three
Thoughts
n
Translation"
n
Paula
Richman,
d.,
Many
Redmryanas:
he Di-
versity
f
Narrative
radition
n
SouthAsia
Delhi:
Oxford
niversity
ress),
pp.
22-49.
Rinehart,
obin 1996.
"Interpretations
f
the
Poetry
f
Bullhe
Shah."
nternational
Journal
f
Punjab
Studies,
,
1,
pp.
45-63.
Sayyad,
Ghafran
984.
Panjabi
dd
Nidharak
hd'r
BullheShah.
Lahore:
Punjabi
Tahaqiqati
Markaz.
Schimmel,
nnemarie 971.
"The Influence f
Sufism
n
Indo-Muslim
oetry"
n
Joseph
.
Strelka,d.,
Anagogic
ualities
f
Literature.
Univ.
ark,
A:Penn-
sylvania
tate
University
ress),
p.
181-210.
1975.Mystical imensionsf slam.ChapelHill:UniversityfNorth arolina
Press.
1982. "Reflections
n
Popular
Muslim
Poetry,"
n RichardC.
Martin, d.,
ContributionsoAsian
Studies:
Vol.
17,
slam n Local Contexts.
Leiden:
E.J.
Brill),
pp.
17-26.
Sekhon,
ant
Singh
nd Kartar
ingh
Duggal
1992.A
History fPunjabi
Literature.
New
Delhi:
Sahitya
Akademi.
Sharda,
adhu Ram 1974.
Sufi
Thought:
ts
Development
n
Panjab
and
Its Im-
pact
on
Panjabi
Literature
rom
Baba Farid
to
1850 AD. Delhi:
Munshiram
Manoharlal.
1976."Bullhe hah
dd
Sifi
Vicardhdra,"
n Diwan
Singh
nd Bikram
ingh
Ghuman, ds.,
Bullhe
Shdh
dcdKdvi Lok:
Alocnd
te
Path.
(Jalandhar:
ew
Book
Company), p.
32-53.
1984. "Bullhe Shah,Safi an Sant,"Khoj Patrika, ain BullheShahArik,
Patiala:Publications
ureau,
anjabiUniversity,
o.
23,
pp.
51-59.
Singh,
Atam,
ranslator940.
Songs f
Bullah,
nd d. Lahore:
anjabi
AdabiLaihr.
Singh,
Kuldip
1969.
Bullhe
hah
dd
Sifit
nubhav. udhiana:
ahore
Book
Shop.
Singh,
rilochan 986.
"Bullhe
hah dd
Tasawwuf,"
n
qbal
Salauddin,
d.,
La'ldn
di
pan1d.
Lahore:
Arbez
Publishers),
p.
430-438.
Sital,
Jit
ingh
1970.
Bullhe
hah:
Jivan e Racnd.Patiala:
PunjabiUniversity.
Stewart,
ony
K. and
Carl
W. Ernst
orthcoming.Syncretism"
n
Peter
J.
Claus
and
Margaret
.
Mills, ds.,
SouthAsian
Folklore:
n
Encyclopedia.
Garland
Publishing).
Usborne,
.F.
1976.
Bullah
Shah:
Sufi,Mystic
nd Poet
of
he
Panjab.
Lahore:
aadi
Panjabi
Academy.
eprint
905 ed.
Recommended