ro6 A DEMON WITH RUBY EYESUch as representative of a despotic Islam that conquered, forcibly con-
verted, and then systematically erased the Hindu past. The visible-
invisible graves and the visible-invisible temple represent the stark
reality of this erasure in Uch. My assertion to my hosts and frli.ends in
this city that has hosted non-Muslims for the majority of its extended
history elicited neither disdain nor disbelief. They do not identify
Hindus as Pakistani. Hindus are unseen even when their material re-
mains are visible in the landscape, and their histories are forgotten
even though they form the past.^4
The grave of the convert Tulsi Das asks us to think about the his-
tory of religious and political difference in medieval Uch. Throughout
the medieval period, Uch ;md Multan were central pilgrimage sites
for Vishnavite and Surya devotees, and their admixture with-Isma'ili
tradition created the Satpanth tradition. From the beginning of the
tenth century, the sacral geography of Uch consisted of the landscape
of Vedas intersected with Shi'a and Sunni polities. Built on the same
temple pilgrim network in Uch, the new Sufi networks linked Iraq,
Iran, and India from the twelfth century onward. Specific pilgrim
groups included the Suhrawardi (founded by Shaykh Najib al-Din
Suhrawardi, d. rr49) and the Qadiriya (founded by Shaykh 'Abdul-Qadir
Jilani, d. rr65).
This chapter explores the political theory of understanding differ-
ence presented in Chachnama. ·Early-thirteenth-century Sind was not
only a world of acute claims to power and territory by multiple war-
lords, it was also a world of sacral difference among the elite as well
the populace. As a text of political theory, Chachnama sought to ad-
dress this central concern by considering the question of religious dif-
ference, cohabitation, and political organization in Sind. I show that
Chachnama focused on the recognition of diverse sacrality, the quest
for accommodation of different communities, and politics' role in gov-
erning difference.
In Cha'pter 3, we saw how Chachnama makes an argument for fore-
grounding the role of advisors and of advice, emphasizes the dialogic
process by framing it in epistolary exchanges, and asks the reader to
ruminate on multiple meanings in the text. In revisiting the question
of difference in the medieval Muslim past, I seek to counter argu-