[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [General history and culture](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general) › [History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950) › c19 # History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c19: Chapter XIX. An Estimate of ‘Alāuddīn History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c19 - **Language:** English ### Chapter XIX. An Estimate of ‘Alāuddīn ### [c19.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.2) Before closing the study of ‘Alāuddīn’s reign, it would be proper to review his career as a man, and his achievements as an emperor. Ascending the throne at the age of thirty he had reached the apogee of power at forty-five through unrivalled skill, studied tact, and phenominal energy. From nothingness he rose to be one of the greatest rulers of medieval times. With the help of a strong and disciplined army he pulled down native princes and stamped out sedition from the land. By a systematic tariff policy he controlled the fluctuating market, and with an efficient administrative machinery effectively governed the country for two decades. ### [c19.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.3) Contemporary historians speak little about the king’s personal features, but they throw sufficient light on his character and qualities. The sultan was almost without any literary education, though like Akbar and Ranjit Singh after him, he confirmed by example the Tennysonian dictum “that only those who cannot read can rule.”¹ But though unlettered, ‘Alāuddīn possessed sufficient commonsense, experience and wisdom which multiplied with age. Learned historians like Amīr Arslān Kulāhī, sincere nobles like ‘Alāulmulk, and orthodox \*‘ulamās\* like Qāzī Mughīsuddīn were always ready to tender advice to him on important matters. ‘Alāuddīn’s early association with the veteran Malik ‘Alāulmulk, who guided his feet to the throne, must also have contributed to his store of wordly wisdom, which he possessed in a considerable degree. 'Alāuddīn took pride in his counsellor-generals Alp Khān, Nuṣrat Khān, Ulugh Khān and Ẓafar Khān. In his later years he was influenced by the evil genius of Kāfūr. There is, however, no reason to think that the sultan was under the influence of any one of these. The life-story of 'Alāuddīn shows that he was a self-willed man, and did not listen to anybody's advice when he was determined on something; still, it is also true that he consulted his noblemen on perplexing problems and listened to their suggestions patiently. ### [c19.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.4) ¹ Ziyāuddīn states that the sultan was utterly devoid of any education and could neither read nor write (Baranī p. 262). Ferishtah’s assertion that in his later years he himself used to read the reports of the secret agents, is open to doubt, for the sultan could have got them read out by some one instead of personally perusing them. ### [c19.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.5) The lack of love of learning, which imparts to a man elements of humanity and kindness, may be responsible for the callousness and cruelty inherent in 'Alāuddīn's nature. Every sentiment of kindness and clemency became extinct in the emperor's heart when anything harmful for the state was done. His punishments of the families of the mutineers at Jalor filled the heart of even a medieval chronicler like Baranī with shame and disgust. He writes that owing to his inherent cruelty, arrogance and harsh temperament, the sultan inflicted tyrannical punishments after the fashion of the notorious pharoah, and neither tie of blood nor attachments of near relationship detered him from inflicting severest penalties.² His barbarous punishments of tradesmen, the atrocities of Nuṣrat Khān on the people of Delhi, and the callousness of the sultan in killing his kith and kin, are simply apalling. The assassinations of Jalāluddīn, Ikat Khān, 'Umar Khān and Mangu Khān and the secret poisoning of Ulugh Khān, testify to the almost inhuman nature of the king. It is true that the recurring rebellions of the rich and the wickedness of the government officials gave him sufficient justification to be stern but at the same time it cannot be denied that his punishments bordered on barbarism. ### [c19.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.6) ² Baranī pp. 335-36. ### [c19.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.7) The sultan possessed a vindictive nature. If once he became prejudiced against anybody, he spared no efforts to destroy him. If once he incarcerated somebody, he never thought of releasing him, and a large number of innocent men used to be punished simply because the king thought them to be guilty.¹ Nothing can be more disconcerting than the punishments of the Jalālī nobles who had, after the murder of their patron, sought protection under the banner of the rising star. So long as 'Alāūddīn needed their support he humoured them into submission, honoured them and distributed among them offices and wealth; but once he was secure on the throne he confiscated their lands, imprisoned some and killed others. The grossness of his nature impelled him to commit such heinous deeds without the slightest qualms of conscience. ### [c19.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.8) ¹ Barani p. 338. ### [c19.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.9) Such a man needs must be free from all sentiments of conjugal love. His life story clearly bears out the fact that he was not romantic. Although he had a number of wives like Jalāluddīn's daughter, a sister of Alp Khan, Badshah Begam, a daughter of Mu'izzuddīn Kaiqubād also known as Malka Māhik and mother of Quṭbuddīn Mubārak Shah, Kamla Devī and the daughter of Rām Deva, yet he does not seem to have been at any time under feminine influence as such. 'Alāūddīn could not pull on with Jalāluddīn's daughter, and Māhrū, for whom he is said to have forsaken his uncle's daughter, passed her last days in painful isolation and imprisonment. All other consorts of the sultan are names not even worth mentioning in the king's biography. In medieval times when woman, wine and song were the order of the day, 'Alāūddīn led a life free from unbridled debauchery. Although during the narrative of his reign we do hear of wine parties in the royal palace as also of the infatuation of the sultan for Kāfūr Hazārdinārī, yet the indulgence of the sultan vanishes into nothingness in comparison with that of Mu‘izzuddīn Kaiqubād, Qutbuddīn Mubārak and even Jalāluddīn Khaljī. ‘Alāuddīn took some wine in his early days, but later on he not only renounced it himself but prohibited its use among the people. ‘Alāuddīn's orders against wine drinking, adultery and prostitution clearly indicate the emperor's bent of mind. ### [c19.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.10) A casual study of Barani's \*Tarikh\* would leave on the reader's mind the impression that ‘Alāuddīn was, if not irreligious, at least unreligious. But that is not true. Although he had not read the Qurān since he was not educated, and although it is also true that he was not punctilious about observing the fast of Ramzan or saying the daily prayers, and was probably the only sultan of Delhi who never went to the Friday prayers and did not permit religious considerations to interfere in state administration, yet he was a true Musalman. He had great faith in his religion and never permitted any irreligious thing to be said or heard.∗ ### [c19.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.11) ∗ Barani p. 339. ### [c19.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.12) ‘Alāuddīn had great respect for contemporary saints. Although he did not personally meet Nizāmuddīn Aulia, he reposed great confidence in the Shaikh's supernatural powers and craved for his blessings through his nobles. During his last days he had become greatly devoted towards Shaikh Nizāmuddīn. Almost all the members of the royal household were disciples of the Shaikh. When ‘Alāuddīn came to know of the departure of Maulana Shamsuddīn Turk without meeting him, he was sorely disappointed.† According to Ziyāuddīn the sultan offered a large amount of money in charity after the death of Ulugh Khān. This may have been mere hypocrisy since, as shown above, Ulugh Khān had fallen a victim to the sultan's suspicions. Be it as it may, the above facts clearly show that the king behaved like a good Musalman in his private life. The orthodox and the almost bigoted historian Ziyāuddīn Barani's standard for a Musalman was almost impossible. If 'Alāuddīn could not come up to that standard it was not his fault. If he divorced religion from politics he had sufficient reasons for doing so. Most of the successful Muslim rulers of India divorced religion from politics. To Amīr Khusrau, 'Iṣāmī, and foreigners like Shamsuddīn Turk and Vaṣṣāf, 'Alāuddīn was a true Musalman. 'Iṣāmī goes as far as to assert that the sultan worked on the principles of the shari'at, and exhibited Islam in his actions.⁶ Comparing 'Alāuddīn with Muḥammad bin Tughluq, 'Iṣāmī says that in the time of 'Alāuddīn the empire became intact on account of his justice, the people were obedient to the king, and there was prosperity in the kingdom,—conditions lacking during Muḥammad's rule.⁷ ### [c19.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.13) † Barani p. 299. ### [c19.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.14) ⁶ \*Futūh\* p. 569. ### [c19.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.15) ⁷ Ibid. pp. 569-70. ### [c19.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.16) Reference may here be made to the charge of bigotry levelled against 'Alāuddīn. A thorough study of the sultan's character clearly shows that religious considerations did not prompt him to oppress the Hindus in any way. Under his vigorous administration intriguing nobility, profiteering merchants and contumacious landholders suffered terribly, while the middle class traders and poor peasants also could not escape the privations that followed in the train of his rigorous laws. If the bulk of the population of the country as well as most of the landholders and cultivators were Hindus, it was but natural that the Hindus would suffer most from his tariff and revenue regulations. If the kingdoms 'Alāuddīn attacked belonged to the Hindu Rajas, if at the time of warfare their Hindu subjects suffered, and if the war indemnity taken from the vanquished Hindu princes was called \*jaziyah\* in official terminology, it was not at all due to the fact that ‘Alāuddīn was a bigot. There is no instance to prove that ‘Alāuddīn oppressed some people simply because they were Hindus and favoured some because they were Musalmans. If traders suffered, it was not that only Hindu traders suffered, if the revenue regulations were oppressive to the people, they were not enforced against the Hindus only, and if the nobility were suppressed it was not that only the Hindu nobles were suppressed. In fact ‘Alāuddīn’s treatment of the nobility was perhaps the most severe and there were very few, if any, Hindu noblemen in ‘Alāuddīn’s days. It must, however, be remembered that in the early days of Muslim rule in India the sultans had to establish their power and rule on a race different from theirs in religion, society and culture. Naturally they could not trust them with high administrative jobs. Moreover, the sultans themselves occasionally sought advice from learnedmen—\*maulvis\* and \*mullas\*—who were generally orthodox and not infrequently bigoted. Constant wars, of course of a military and political character, were fought with Hindu Rajas and a subconscious feeling of animosity existed between the Turkish ruling class, consisting of the sultan and his bureaucracy, and the conquered people. Under such circumstances it is too much to expect from early Turkish sultans like Iltutmish, Balban and ‘Alāuddīn to be very liberal towards the native population and throw open posts to the people of all religions. That is why we hardly find many, if any, talented Hindu officers being appointed to high administrative posts in ‘Alāuddīn’s time. In the Mughal period things were different. Under Akbar and his successors almost the whole of India had come under Muslim domination and the Hindus could safely be trusted with high posts and treated equally with the Muslims. Thus if Balban and ‘Alāuddīn were not inclined to give equal opportunities to the Hindus it was but natural. Besides this, there is no proof that ‘Alāuddīn oppressed the Hindus because of their religion. ### [c19.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.17) The ruling passion of the sultan was ambition. He thirsted for immortality. To transcend the victories of Alexander and to found a religion which would not let die his name in the annals of mankind, were the two burning desires of his soul. His unpractical notions were aggravated by the stimulation of wine, flattery of friends, and the great good fortune that attended all his enterprises. But luckily 'Alāūddin always lent a ready ear to sincere advice, and his almost mad schemes were toned down by the faithful counsellor Malik 'Al that he was a promising general. It is alleged that 'Alāuddīn himself was not a great general and his victories were due to his able commanders like Alp Khān and Naib Kāfūr. But this view is wholly incorrect. While yet an unknown figure, 'Alāūddīn had distinguished himself in the fighting against Malik Chhajjū (1292) and in raiding Bhilsa (1292). Thereafter his astounding success against the powerful Maratha army of Devagiri established his reputation as a military commander. Just after his occupation of the throne 'Alāūddīn himself could not safely leave the capital and therefore sent Ulugh Khān and Nuṣrat Khān to occupy Multan and conquer Gujarat. But in 1299 'Alāūddīn successfully defeated Qutlugh Khvājā and in 1303 repulsed perhaps the most formidable Mughal invasion under Targhī. The way in which he argued with Malik 'Alaulmulk before marching against the Mongols, clearly shows the spirit of gallantry and sportsmanship the king possessed. The entrenchment 'Alāūddīn prepared to defend himself against the Mughals during Targhī's invasion shows his ingenuity as a strategist. The most formidable battles, as can well be expected, were fought either against the Mughals or in Rajputana and in most of them the sultan showed his organizing capacity, his diplomacy and his military skill. When Ulugh Khān was compelled to retreat during his siege of Ranthambhor, 'Alāūddīn himself marched against it and reduced it simply through his persistent exertions and superior military genius. In 1303 'Alāūddīn was successful in reducing Chittor, which had not been taken by any previous sultan and which put an edge on the teeth of even a strong emperor like Akbar. The victory at Chittor was followed by a death-grappling struggle with the Mughals in which also the king gained an astounding success. From 1303 onwards 'Alāūddīn effected certain administrative reforms and could not move out of the capital but the work of conquest was carried on by his generals like 'Ainul Mulk Multānī and Naib Kāfūr. In 1308 Kāfūr marched to the south and 'Alāuddīn himself marched to Sevana. Thus from 1290 to 1308 'Alāuddīn was constantly fighting, always to court victory. When Kāfūr began his meteoric career in the south, the sultan found ample opportunity to take rest from camp life and construct buildings of beauty, grace and grandeur. 'Alāuddīn's military genius is exhibited in so far as he made his commanders obediently carry out his orders and conquer for him. In an age when strife and disaffection were rife and a military leader almost invariably aspired for the throne, brilliant generals like Ulugh Khān, Nuṣrat Khān, Malik Kāfūr and Ghāzī Malik showed unflinching obedience towards the king. To make such people undertake conquests in his name shows the superiority of 'Alāuddīn's military talents, his born military leadership and the fact that he was a general of generals. ### [c19.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.18) 'Alāuddīn's hardships of military life were relieved by his constant pursuit of field sports. The king was very fond of big game shooting. His absorbing interest in field sports as well as pigeon-flying and hawking was so well known that some of the plots against his life aimed at killing him while he was busy in sports. The emperor was very fond of flying hawks and a large number of these birds and some slave boys, who used to fly them, were maintained by the state. The sultan also spent his leisure hours in the company of boon companions. In his early days he used to drink hard, but the stern realities of the political situation as well as the sincere admonitions of Malik 'Alāulmulk put a check upon his excesses. The royal cellars were emptied and drinking vessels were broken to pieces. Nevertheless, the king could not give up drinking completely. But as time passed he bent towards sobriety; he drank little and never gave himself up to the devil. In spite of his harsh disposition 'Alāuddīn had a soft corner for his companions like Tājuddīn 'Irāqī, Khudāvand Zāda Chashnigīr, Ruknuddīn Dabīr, A'izzuddīn Yaghan and Nūr Khān. He never used to get tired of their repartees and witticism.⁹ In matters of women, wine and song ‘Alāuddīn was neither an uncompromising moralist nor a slave of the senses. ### [c19.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.19) ⁹ Barani 357-58. ### [c19.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.20) The sultan’s pursuit of innocent pleasures did not relax his vigilance over matters of state. All important papers were placed before him and his argus eye kept a close watch upon the various branches of the government administration. It is as an administrator than anything else that ‘Alāuddīn stands head and shoulder above his predecessors. His accomplishments as a warrior were dwarfed by his achievement as an organiser. His administrative genius is best exhibited in the various novel methods and schemes he formulated to govern the country as he desired. Direct recruitment of soldiers, the systems of branding and cash payment, the control of the market, rationing and issue of permits, the enrolment of merchants and the dozen other measures prove beyond doubt the ingenuity of the king’s mind. ‘Alāuddīn was an administrative \*entrepreneur\*; he conceived novel ideas and struck on new grounds. As pointed out before, all his councellors like Zafar Khān, Nuṣrat Khān, Ulugh Khān and also probably ‘Alāulmulk had all died before 1302, while Alp Khān was staying far off in Gujarat untill about 1314, and it was surely the inventive genius of ‘Alāuddīn which struck at the idea of the so many measures cited above. ‘Alāuddīn, for the first time, introduced measurement of land, local government, and laws about collection of revenue. These did not exist before. Although himself unlettered ‘Alāuddīn obtained reports about the market from a number of sources and punished the culprits and delinquents. His ingenuity for superb administrative talent is exhibited in his sending small boys, who easily eluded suspicion of shopkeepers, to the market-place to test the honesty and veracity of the merchants. ### [c19.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.21) Not only in matters of civil administration but also in military sphere 'Alāuddīn worked more with his mind than with an unreserved bravery. The accounts of his various wars with the Mughals clearly show the sultan's capacity for organizing defence; not a few times by deluding the enemy or exhausting his patience. 'Alāuddīn's grasp of the art of war compensated for the alleged lack of personal bravery. ### [c19.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.22) 'Alāuddīn was an imperialist through and through, but notwithstanding his desire for incessant conquest and expansion of his dominions, he was well aware of the dangers of adopting an uncompromising annexationist policy. The annexation of Ranthambhor, Chittor and Sevana had brought innumerable difficulties in their train, and 'Alāuddīn was shrewd enough not to repeat his follies in the Deccan. He defeated the Deccan princes, levied rich tributes upon them, but at the same time left them with their possessions. By this policy he made friends of foes. The cordial way in which he received the rulers of Devagiri and Dwarsamudra and gave them honour and titles and left them in possession of their territories, goes to prove 'Alāuddīn's grasp of the existing political condition of India. The annexation of the south by Muḥammad bin Tughlaq was followed by insurmountable difficulties. 'Alāuddīn's policy shows the superiority of his political acumen. He clearly saw that there was no use in annexing what could not be consolidated. 'Alāuddīn's Deccan policy left a number of faithful allies in the south who not only remained loyal and obedient to him but helped him in some of his military enterprises. In the north, however, places like Malwa, Ujjain, Dharanagri and Gujarat, where Muslim influence had penetrated even before 'Alāuddīn's conquest, the sultan did not hesitate to annex and carry out his imperialistic ambitions to the very end. ### [c19.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.23) In his conquests, in befriending enemies and in administrative reforms 'Alāuddīn can be compared to one of the greatest emperors of India, Akbar: So far as the policy of territorial aggrandizement is concerned both 'Alāuddīn and Akbar believed in the principal that might is right. Like Akbar after him 'Alāuddīn also firmly believed that "A monarch should ever be intent on conquest otherwise his neighbours rise in arms against him."¹⁰ Again like a shrewd diplomat 'Alāuddīn followed the policy of befriending his enemies as Akbar adopted in case of the Rajputs. Some of the Rajput states which had always fought the Muslim rulers in India became Akbar's best supporters. In the same way some of the Deccan kings, in whose country 'Alāuddīn's generals had carried fire and sword became his loyal supporters. 'Alāuddīn was perhaps the first Muslim ruler who left Hindu kings in their positions provided they paid tribute. In certain spheres 'Alāuddīn showed great originality, and some of his military and revenue reforms were adopted by prominent kings long after. Sher Shah adopted most of 'Alāuddīn's military reforms, such as direct recruitment, branding of horses and cash payment. Measurement of land and assessment of land revenue on the basis done by 'Alāuddīn are also found in Todarmal's system, in the time of Sher Shah and Akbar. The only objectionable thing in 'Alāuddīn's administration is that it was based exclusively on force. While the various revenue, administrative and economic reforms of Sher Shah and Akbar were only done to benefit the people, 'Alāuddīn took harshest steps just in the name of defence of the country and even for his own glory. ### [c19.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.24) ¹⁰ \*Ain-i-Akbari\* p. 399. ### [c19.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.25) By the irony of circumstance 'Alāuddīn also contemplated to found a new religion as Akbar actually did two centuries later. But 'Alāuddīn was not so cultured as Akbar was. His ruling passion was ambition and he thought of founding a religion which would immortalise him, and not for uniting the various diverse classes, castes and creeds under one banner. Akbar's motives in founding the Din-i-Ilahi were humane and honourable, whereas 'Alāuddīn's were only selfish and egoistic. ### [c19.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.26) What could this monarch achieve for the Turkish Sultanate in India during his rule of a score years? It is generally believed that 'Alāuddīn left nothing of permanence. According to the contemporary Shaikh Bashīr Divānā, 'Alāuddīn's government had no stable foundation and the Khaljī dynasty was easily supplanted because of the inherent weaknesses of the 'Alāī rule. There is no doubt that 'Alāuddīn's administrative system had its defects. His government was one man's rule, and as Sir Jadunath aptly remarks "a government of personal discretion is, by its very nature, uncertain.¹¹ 'Alāuddīn's rule was based on force, not on will of the people. The king was only feared and obeyed but not loved or respected. The sultan neglected the economic prosperity of the state and just to benefit his military (and as a concommitant non-military) population, he killed every incentive to trade and commerce. Under his regulations the traders had neither freedom of movement nor hope of profit. He put the peasantry to utmost exertions. His vigorous spy system made people's life distasteful, and the suppression of baronage left the government in a paralytic state when the emperor's eyes were closed. But all these accusations do not seem to hold water when a careful and critical analysis of his solid achievements is made. 'Alāūddīn had achieved much. His imperialistic policy had turned a small kingdom, as the sultanate of Delhi was, into an empire comprising of the major portion of India. He was the first ruler whose political hegemony extended over a major portion of the Deccan peninsula. He dealt a death blow to the Mughal aggrandisement which not only stood in the way of the expansion of the Turkish arms, \[but threatened the very existence of Muslim rule in this country.\] If some of the kingdoms 'Alāuddīn conquered became independent about the time of his death it did not mean that 'Alāuddīn's achievements were mean. He had curbed the power of the Hindu Rajas in the far off south, and had it not been for his success in that region, a debauch like Qutbuddin could never have marched to Devagiri and flayed alive Harpal Deva. 'Alāuddīn's work at least had permanent results if his conquests were not permanent. It was 'Alāuddīn who had exhibited to his successors the vulnerability of the states beyond the Vindhyas. His system of administration had enabled him successfully to rule the country for two decades, and its value is judged by the fact that most of his administrative measures served as models for later monarchs. Barani aptly enumerates the glorious features particular to 'Alāuddīn's regime, which are not to be found in the rule of any other king. The first special feature of 'Alāuddīn's times is the cheapness of the necessaries of life and fixed rates of grains in seasons of plenty and scarcity; the second is the unbroken chain of victories which the king and his commanders obtained, and it appeared as if victory preceded a military enterprise; the third is the crushing of the Mongols; the fourth is that a large force remained calm and contended on a small salary; the fifth is that contumacious landholders were suppressed; the sixth is that roads and highways became safe, and those who used to rob were made to guard them; seventh, that the traders were compelled to be honest; eighth is the abundance of strong buildings; ninth, that Hindus were compelled into obedience and Muslims had become true, abstemious and just; and the tenth is the congregation of artists and learned men such as had not been found to exist in any other reign. ### [c19.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19.27) ¹¹ Sarkar: \*Shivaji\*, p. 391. ## Cites (5) - [Devagiri (Daulatabad)](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.devagiri) - [Bhilsa](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.bhilsa) - [Multân](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.raj-bhir-multan) - [Chittor](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.chittor) - [Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tarikh-i-firuzshahi-afif) — Shams-i Sirāj ʿAfīf, Persian --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.lal-1950.c19) · Pramāṇa