Sayed Ali was born most probably in Shahr-i Babak, where he passed his early life with his mother. He also came in Kahek after his father's arrival from Khorasan. He was also known as Shah Ataullah II among the Nimatullahi Sufi order. He was a popular figure as an amir in Shahr-i Babak and Kirman among the elites. He is also known as Rais al-Kirman (Lord of Kirman), an honour which ultimately promoted him to the governorship of Kirman. He was also a leading landlord, and had acquired many lands in Shahr-i Babak and Sirjan. He built many streets in Kirman, known after his name, none of them existed during the Qajarids period.
Shah Abbas I was on the verge of death when he had no son to succeed him. He died in 1038/1629, and was succeeded by his grandson, Sam Safi, known as Shah Safi. Sir John Chardin, who was visiting Iran in 1077/1666 had remarked in his 'Voyages du Chevalier Chardin en Perse' (Paris, 1811, 3rd vol., p. 291) that: 'D_s que ce grand et bon prince eut cess? de vivre, la Perse cessa de prosp?rer, i.e., 'When this great prince (Shah Abbas) ceased to live, Persia ceased to prosper.' Under Shah Safi, the conversion of 'state' to 'crown' provinces was extended. His vizir Sadru Taqi put forward an argument which the new king found attractive, since the Safavid state was now relatively secure from its external enemies, he said, there was no point in allowing a large part of Safavid territory to remain in the hands of Kizilbash governors, who remitted little to the royal treasury. Thus, the provinces of Qazwin, Gilan, Mazandaran, Yazd, Kirman, Khorasan and Azerbaijan were all brought under the administration of the crown except in time of war, when Kizilbash governors were reappointed.

Shah Safi died at the early age of 32 years, as he was making preparations for an expedition to recover Kandhar from the Mughals. There seems to be general agreement that he was addicted to opium, and, according to some, was prescribed alcoholic drinks by his physicians to counteract the evil effects of the opium. He was succeeded by his son, Abbas II, who came to the throne in 1052/1642 at the age of eight and a half. As already mentioned, the system of converting 'state' to 'crown' provinces was carried on by Shah Abbas II on a large scale, with the result that almost the whole country was brought under the direct administration of the crown except in time of war, when adhoc military governors were appointed to strategically important frontier provinces. Ann K.S. Lambton writes in 'Landlord and Peasant in Persia' (London, 1953, p. 108) that, 'Shah Abbas II, continuing his father, Shah Shafi's policy, abolished provincial governments in the interior of the kingdom wherever there was no danger of war, as in Qazwin, Gilan, Mazandaran, Yazd, Kirman, Khurasan and Azarbayjan'. We may be well assured that the Ismailis in these provinces, had acquired respite in the absence of political turmoil. Shah Abbas II managed to preserve the frontier of the empire intact, and even recaptured Kandhar from the Mughals in 1058/1648 and repulsed three subsequent attempts by the emperor Aurengzeb to recover it.

The Mughal emperors in India at that time were Jahangir (1605-1627) and Shah Jehan (1627-1658). Jahangir invaded Kandhar and included it in Mughal dominion, but it was re-occupied by Shah Abbas II in 1648, resulting a dispute between Iran and India.

Captain William Hawkins was the first English to have visited the court of Jahangir in 1608 and took permission of trade facility and the opening of a factory in Surat. Sir Thomas Roe arrived in India in 1617 for opening other new factories. The entry of the British gradually in India resulted their political ambition. Having secured a sound foothold, the British began interfering in the internal affairs of the state under one pretext or another. Ultimately, because of their cleverness, superior military strategy and latest weapons, they wiped off all the forces contending for supremacy on the Indian soil and became the undisputed masters of the sub-continent for one century and half.

Heretofore, we have discussed that Shah Abbas I had attempted to incorporate the Sufi elements in the administrative structure in 1588, and as a result, many Kizilbash embraced Sufism in Iran. The Ismaili dais began to preach in the cloak of Sufis, and there are certain indications that many Kizilbash had privily come under the yoke of Ismailism in the time of Imam Nizar. Thus, Imam Sayed Ali also assumed among them the Turkish sounding name, Sayed Abul Hasan Beg.

The liberal policy towards the Sufism declined in Iran with the death of Shah Abbas in 1038/1629. The Sufis began to be persecuted and killed, and their khanqahs (cloisters) were demolished. Roger Savory writes in 'Iran under the Safavids' (New York, 1980, p. 237) that, 'After the death of Shah Abbas I, the status of the Sufis continued to decline, and in the 17th century, less than two hundred years after, Sufi zeal and devotion had brought the Safavids to power, the mujtahid Mohammad Bakir Majlisi denounced Sufism as the foul and hellish growth.' The Sufis were searched from all corners and scourged to death as an act of religious services. The Nimatullahi Sufi order was also not spared, and before the massacre of the Ismailis, known as Ataullahis in Khorasan and Kirman, Imam Sayed Ali ordered them to join the royal army at once, which avoided the danger of massacre. It is known that a small regiment of Ataullahis in the Safavid army, was also created in Khorasan and Kirman.

Nizar was born in 982/1574 in Anjudan, and ascended at the age of 11 years. He is known as Shah Ataullah among the Iranian mystics. His father had brought him in Kahek in 992/1584, and henceforward, Kahek became the next headquarters. It took few years to the Ismailis to settle in Kahek and its locality. He also founded a village near Kuhubandi, known as Kahek of Aqa Nizar, then became known as Bagh-i Takhat. The colony of the farmers in this village was also known as Nizarabad. The Ismaili merchants of Kirman are said to have built a small palace for Nizar in Kahek, which became known as Kahek-i Shah Nizar, where a small marble platform had been erected in a garden, facing the palace. It is said that the Imam would sit on this platform, which was surrounded by water, when giving audience. His guests would be placed amid flower beds on the other side of the water. Kahek, or Kiagrak is situated about 35 kilometers northest of Anjudan and north-west of Mahallat.

From the extant qasida, it appears that Imam Nizar was physically weak. He was of a middle height like his ancestor Ali bin Abu Talib. In his qasida, he however says:-

Har chand ke man dar nazar'e khalq nizaram,

Sad shukar ke dar alam'e tahaqiq nazaram.

means, 'Although I am looking weak in the eyes of the people, but it is a matter of thank that I am watching the world of reality.'

Gar pustam wa gir'rai hakiram na chunanam,

Kaz rah'e jalal'e nasab akbaraz'e kibaram.

means, 'Physically, I am looking weak and small in size, but I am not so in reality. Because of the dignity of my (illustrious) linage, I am greater than the greatest ones.'
The Safavid Shah Abbas ruled Iran from 995/1588 to 1038/1628. He restored peace with severe actions. He reduced the number of provincial governors to curb the power of Kizilbash, and took punitive action against them for their disloyalty. Shah Abbas also turned to the third force, which Shah Tahmasp had introduced into the state, and created their regiments which constituted the nucleus of a standing army. He also took the power of collecting revenue from the Kizilbash, and demanded accounts of expenditure from his governors. The chief of the Ustajlu faction in Khorasan, Murshid Quli Khan, was a powerful Kizilbash leader, who was responsible for placing Shah Abbas on the throne; had assumed that, as in the past, he would be able to bend the king to his will. Shah Abbas had him executed in 996/1589. Hence, the Uzbeks overran the province of Sistan, and invaded Mashhad, but it had been repulsed. In 1005/1598, Shah Abbas transferred his capital from Qazwin to Ispahan. He expanded his influence in Herat and defeated the Uzbeks, and annexed Balkh in his state. In 1014/1605, he attacked on the Turks and recovered Tabriz.

Shah Abbas is noted as a great builder, and so was very cruel. In 1024/1615, he executed his son, Muhammad Bakir, the then governor of Khorasan. His another son Hasan predeceased him. In 1030/1621, when he fell ill, his third son Muhammad prematurely celebrated his death. When Shah Abbas recovered, he blinded Muhammad. In 1035/1626, he blinded his only surviving son, Quli Mirza. Hence, he had no male issue to succeed him. He died in 1038/1629 after ruling for 42 years, and was succeeded by his grandson, Sam Mirza, surnamed Shah Shafi, the son of Muhammad Bakir.

The Ottoman empire was sunk into the internal disputes after sultan Suleman, and lost many regions from the Safavids. Unemployment, poor exports and the worsening condition of the peasants had badly paralysed the economy of Turkey. Earlier, the Europe and United States imported silver from Turkey for minting coins, but now they began the coinage with other cheap metal, causing heavy loss of mine business in the country. The Safavid Shah Abbas used to export the silken costumes and carpets to Europe through the port of Turkey, but it was stopped because of the newly formed Port Abbas in Iran, resulting another heavy crack in the tax-income of Turkey. In sum, the Ottoman empire began to come in its ebb.

Bayazid Ansari (1525-1581), known as Pir-i Rawshan originated a Roshaniyya cult in Kabul and Kashmir. His works, 'Khayr al-Bayan', 'Maksud al- Muminin', 'Surat-i Tawhid', 'Fakhr', 'Hal-Nama' etc. were rigorously opposed by the Sunni ulema. The Mughals persecuted his followers and executed many of them. It must be known that the Ismaili mission had no relation with the Roshaniyya sect, but Bayazid Ansari seems to have been influenced with the esoteric doctrines of the Ismailis in Kandhar. Nevertheless, a bulk of the Ismailis were also scourged to death in Kashmir during the Mughal operations, forcing the surviving Ismailis to migrate to Punjab, where they emerged under the name of the Shamsi.

The Shi'ism dominated in Iran with the foundation of the Safavid kingdom and brought forth many eminent scholars and theologians, viz., Mulla Muhammad Amin Astrabadi (d. 1033/1623), known as Mir Damad, who compiled many works on Shiite jurisprudence, and founded a thought, known as Akhbari against those Shias, who professed the doctrines of Ijtihad. The Akhbari group adhered only to Holy Koran, Hadith and the sayings of twelve Imams being the source of authority. In contrast, the other Shias, known as Usuli believed in Holy Koran, Hadith and Qiyas. They used to debate each other, and their polemical writings had become a major industry in Iran. This period is also noted for the introduction of marsiya (mourning songs) and the commemoration of the rawda-khani (recital of the martyrdom of Imam Hussain) during Muharram.

In addition, the ilm al-kalam (theology), hikmat (wisdom), irfan (gnosis) and the Sufic thought also accelerated. Iran was a fertile land to nourish philosophy and wisdom, and gave birth of prominent scholars, viz., Ibn Turka Ispahani (d. 835/1431), Sayed Hyder Ali Amuli (11th/16th cent.), Mir Dad (d. 1041/1631), Muhammad Bakir Majlisi (d. 1110/1699), Mulla Sadra (d. 1050/1640), Mohsin-i Fayd Kashani (d. 1091/1680), Abdur Razzak Lahiji (d. 1072/1661), Rajab Ali Tabrizi (d. 1080/1699) etc.

Roger Savory writes in 'Iran under the Safavids' (New York, 1980, p. 91) that, 'We have seen the period from the establishment of the Safavid state in 1501, upto the accession of Shah Abbas I in 1588, was one of change and experiment. An attempt was made to incorporate the original Sufi organization of the Safavid Order in the administrative structure of the state.' Thus, under Shah Abbas, the Sufism came to life once again.

In India, the Kadiwal Sayeds continued the tradition of Ismaili mission despite several impediments. Fourth in the line of Sayed Mashaikh bin Sayed Rehmatullah Shah bin Pir Hasan Kabir, was Sayed Fazal Shah; who operated proselytizing mission in north Gujrat with a tremendous effect upon the local peasants. His disciples islamized their names and forsook irrelevant customs. He is said to have visited Iran in 1035/1625 during the period of Imam Nizar and was appointed as a vakil. The tradition relates that Nizar also sent with him his one relative, called Pir Kassim Shah. Both of them not only conducted the proselytism afresh, but also accelerated the economical condition of the Ismailis. It appears that their secret mission was closely noticed by Aurengzeb at Gujrat. In the meantime, Sayed Fazal Shah died in the village of Jetral in 1068/1659, and left behind two sons, Sayed Hasan Shah and Sayed Mashaikh Shah II (1060-1108/1650-1697). Sayed Hasan Shah, known as Hasan Pir (1062-1126/1652-1715) became next vakil and continued to work with Pir Kassim Shah in place of his father. It is however related that Sayed Mashaikh Shah had strong proclivity towards Sunnism, and renounced his allegiance to the Imam. He is said to have visited the Mughal emperor Aurengzeb in the Deccan, and reviled the faith of his forbears to win the heart of the emperor.
Aurengzeb, who knew the Ismaili activities in Gujrat, had sent a certain Mir Shamsuddin in Gujrat with a troop when Pir Kassim Shah and Hasan Pir were on a trip of Kathiawar. Mir Shamsuddin read the royal decree before the Ismailis, impugning them to forsake Ismailism and espouse Sunnism, otherwise they would be beheaded with their children, and their properties would be confiscated. Sayed Mashaikh Shah also tried to convince them to give up Ismaili faith, and as a result, many Ismailis embraced Sunnism, but other 500 Ismaili families flatly refused, who became known as momins or later on mominas. The seceders were called, chilia in Gujrat. The momina Ismailis were imprisoned at Patan. In the meantime, Pir Kassim Shah and Hasan Pir rushed to Ahmadnagar, and filed suit before the chief judge, who, after the proceeding of three days, exculpated the Ismailis, declaring the Ismailis as true Muslims. This may be perhaps the first legal verdict in India if the tradition is genuine. Pir Kassim Shah and Hasan Pir came in Patan and relieved the Ismailis. Henceforward, the Ismailis broke their relation with the chilia, the followers of Sayed Mashaikh Shah, who died in 1108/1697 in Ahmadabad, and his followers later quarrelled as to whether he had been a Sunni or Shia, causing further internal splits. Pir Kassim Shah took about 250 Ismaili families to different villages of Gujrat, and other 250 families were flourished in Kathiawar by Hasan Pir. Pir Kassim Shah died around 1121/1710, and was buried at a village, called Mudana, two miles from Sidhpur. Thus, Hasan Pir had to administer the mission all alone in Gujrat and Kathiawar, and died probably in 1126/1715. Hasan Pir was revered as the saint of the Momina Ismailis. In addition to his mausoleum in Thanapipli, near Junagarh, the local Ismailis built a shrine in 1128/1717 at Ganod, Gujrat as a tribute to Hasan Pir. His shrine is flocked by the multitude of visitors, and one like visit is noteworthy that of Mahomed Ali Jinnah, the founding father of Pakistan, who as a child was taken from Karachi by his parents.

After the death of Pir Kassim Shah and Hasan Pir, the Momina Ismailis were severely in trouble without any other vakil for many years. The Mughal governors seem to have continued the tradition of Aurengzeb, and the circumstances did not allow the Ismailis to divulge their faith or perform prayers in thier prayer-hall. In Surat, the Momina Ismailis were yet tinged with the Hindu social customs and had to live sometimes under Shiite garbs. It seems that the Mughal authorities had made the Hindus and the Shias as their main target, and as a result, the Momina Ismailis had to face problems on either side. It is said that they built a secret prayer-hall in Surat, where both the Muslim-Hindu styles were significantly employed at two main entrances. The first entrance facing the Hindu locality, was ornamented like a temple. The second entrance lying at the street of the Shia Muslims, imitated the design of a mausoleum. The premises was known simply as Vada Bhuvan (big mansion). The Ismailis used secret codes at the entrances before admission. When the enemies hunted the Shia Muslims in their locality, the entranc in that area was to be closed, and another was opened instead. And if the Hindus were persecuted in their locality, the gate lying in that street was to be shut, and other was opened for the service. This was a sort of taqiya that could avoid the Ismailis from being domineered. In the middle of premises, there was a big hall, whose underground chamber was used for prayers. It must be noted that a like tradition of two exterior faces of the secret prayer-hall is reported to have been employed in Surat once again in the middle of 19th century, known as Dada'nu Ghar (house of the grandfather).

It must be noted on this juncture that Sayed Buzrug Ali, the son of Sayed Mashaikh Shah II (d. 1108/1697) is said to have settled in Tando Muhammad Khan in Sind, and died between 1153/1740 and 1158/1745. His son Sayed Hashim Ali Shah was the father of Sayeda Imam Begum, the last composer of the ginans in India.

Imam Nizar died in Kahek in 1038/1628 and was entombed in his small palace, which had been made a domed sepulcher. It is an eye-catching building in Kahek, consisting of different chambers. It also accommodated the graves of Imam's close relatives, but the dates inscribed in the graves are concocted. The mausoleum was renovated in 1805 by the Syrian pilgrims, who stayed in Kahek for many months, and it was again rebuilt in 1966 by the local Ismailis.

It is parenthetically worth mentioning that the dates of the Ismaili Imams of the early post-Alamut period are well recorded in the 'Satveni'ji Vel'by Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah (d. 940/1534), down to the period of Imam Nuruddin Ali (d. 957/1550). It also prompted the Indian Ismailis to write down the dates of the following Imams. The Russian scholar W.Ivanow visited Iran in 1937 and noted the dates of Imams' death from the plaques on the existing mausoleums. While collating the dates of the inscriptions with the traditional records, it seems that the dates of few early Imams are almost in agreement, but other dates are in fair contrast, making a layer of confusion to reconcile them. For instance, the death of Imam Nizar is placed 1038/1628 in the traditional records, but the inscription of mausoleum places 1134/1722, indicating a discrimination of about 94 years. It is, however, much nearer to reasonable possibility that the Indian Ismailis had been in close contact with the Imams after Pir Sadruddin's time in Iran, and they had treasured up the traditional records in their memory with the same tendency which they had employed in learning the ginans, and therefore, the traditional dates cannot be ruled out. Besides, there is another testimony equally potent that Pir Sadruddin is said to have composed a daily prayer (dua) for the Indian followers, wherein the names of the Imams from Hazrat Ali down to the Imam of the time were recited. When an Imam died, the name of his successor was inserted in the daily prayer as the Lord of the Light (noor-shah). Under such practice, the traditional records seem more credible than that of the inscriptions. It seems probable that most of the mausoleums and their inscriptions existed long after the death of the Imams, and none can assert that the scribes had either written the actual dates, or the dates of their own time, or written on guess work. Take it for granted that the inscriptions provide true record, then one would have to brush aside few names of the Imams from the official list, so as to adjust the history with the dates of inscriptions. It also deserves notice that the Indian pilgrims most possibly had visited the mausoleums of the Imams and seen the inscriptions, had these really existed during their time. In spite of reading the extant inscriptions, the Indian pilgrims of later period seem to have clung with their own dominant records, which is ample to judge that they had discarded the uncertain dates of inscriptions. In all this, what should have become abundantly clear is that the dates of the inscriptions are not to be trusted.

It is related that some scholars in the Nimatullahi Sufi order had ignored the Sufic teachings of Imam Nizar in Khorasan. In his sayings, Nizar is reported to have addressed them as under:-

Amruz baman pi nabrad aqeel wa farda,
sajada'i umid kund luh'i mazaram.

'The talented does not try to take benefit from me. When I will depart from the world, he will prostrate before the slab of my tomb as the source of accomplishing hopes.'
It seems that the above qasida was preserved with the Nimatullahis in Khorasan of no avail. When Nizar returned to Kirman and died, many Nimatullahis began to realize its worth after a long time. They seem to have flocked at Kahek when the seat of the Imamate had been transferred from that village, and venerated the mausoleum of Nizar. It is also possible that they had either built Nizar's mausoleum, or had given the present shape to it most possibly in the period of Imam Kassim Ali (d. 1143/1730).

There are many folklores attributed to Nizar. One among them however relates a touching anecdote that Nizar was once sitting at the top of his house at night. Suddenly he heard the gallop of horses, and saw the Safavid horsemen approaching near Kahek, who were loitering for foods and provisions. They spurred their horses on the slopy tract of the village for taking a night respite. For a while, Nizar found himself between the horns of a dilemma. He did not like the hoof of a single horse be entered in Kahek and also avoided to check them through his sleeping guards. He came down at speed and relieved a bulk of lambs from the fold, directing them to make a stampede downwards to impede the mounting horsemen. The lambs jumped down like an advancing column. The horsemen angerily brandished their swords to cut their way in the lines of dashing lambs. The exhausted horsemen were at length forced to come down to the main tract and took flight. Nizar watched the occurrence from the roof, and did not sleep until morning. He however found that all the lambs were brutally killed. Suddenly, he saw a wounded lamb coming calmly from downwards. Nizar came down and took it with his arms lovingly, and made its bandages. The wounded lamb also died at the same moment. This story depicts the services of the lambs, and therefore, the lamp is customarily burnt in the mausoleum of Nizar, fed only with the oil of lamb's fat. It may be remarked as strange that the lamp bearing the oil other than the lamb's fat, it becomes extinguished at once.

It will perhaps be well at this stage to glance that the first western monograph devoted entirely to the subject of the Ismailis seems to be that of Denis Lebey de Batilly, a French official at the court of Henry IV in Europe. The author had become deeply concerned about the revival of political murders in Europe, after the stabbing of Henry III of France at the hands of a Jacobin friar in 1589. He set out in 1595 to compile a short treatise on the true origin of the word assassin, which had acquired a new currency in France.

Kahek had been made the new headquarters in Kirman after Anjudan. Sayed Abdul Nabi was an Indian vakil, who visited Kahek. He was rejoiced to behold Nizar in the garden, facing the palace, which he relates in his ginan that:-
'I enjoyed a trip with the Imam, when my Lord was in the garden.'

Sayed Abdul Nabi's another ginan also gives condensed account that:-

'The everlasting Lord resides in Kahek in the very form of Ali. The apparent Imam Nizar is the 77th epiphany of God, and the 40th Imam.'

Sayed Abdul Nabi mostly preached in Gujrat. In Surat, he came into the close contact of the Gupti Momna Ismailis. He used to organise a weekly religious gathering, known as satsang (the pious congregation) in which the local Hindu families were also invited, notably the Laiwala, Naginawala and Jamiatram families. Sayed Abdul Nabi died in Surat, and his mausoleum is situated at Kankara Khadi, near Surat, which is venerated by the Muslims.

When Shah Abbas I tolerated Sufism in Iran, the tide also turned in favour of the Ismaili mission, providing benigh climate to the dais to propagate Ismailism. Imam Nizar is thus reported to have gone to Khorasan in 1014/1606 with few dais, where he concealed his identity, and assumed a Sufi sounding name, Shah Ataullah among the Nimatullahis. He became the qutb (pole) of the Nimatullahis most probably in Nishapur, Marw, Herat, Balkh and Sebzewar in Khorasan province. Nizar was probably the first Ismaili Imam to become the spiritual master of the Nimatullahis. Nasrollah Pourjavady and Peter Lamborn Wilson write in their write-up, 'Ismailis and Nimatullahis' (Stvdia Islamica, vol., XLI, 1975, Paris, p. 117) that, 'Shah Nizar is the first Ismaili Imam whose ties with the Nimatullahi order are probably definite.' It seems that many Nimatullahis, the followers of Nizar known as Ataullahis had privily adhered Ismailism in Khorasan. When Nizar left Khorasan for Kirman, some of them also joined him. It appears from one extant qasida that Nizar had composed few qasida for them.
The Ismailis in Iran mostly resided in Khorasan, Kirman, Fars and Anjudan. The Ismailis, known as Ataullahis lived in Kirman as the peasants. The Ismailis in Fars were nomadic tribesmen, who were also called as Ataullahis. It is related that a number of slaves of Abayssinia had escaped from being sold at Port Abbas, and took refuge in Kirman and embraced Ismailism. They were very faithful warriors and rendered their services to Nizar as guards.

Mulla Shaikh Ali Gilani writes in 'Tarikh-i Mazandaran' (comp. in 1044/1634, pp. 88-89) that, 'Sultan Muhammad, the Banu Iskandar ruler of Kujur, who succeeded his father in 975/1567 was an Ismaili. He openly emboldened the propagation of Ismailism in Rustamdar. He seized Nur and other localities in Mazandaran and spread Ismaili creed as far as Sari. He died in 998/1590, and was succeeded by his eldest son Jahangir, who was also deep-rooted in Ismailism. He was obliged to go to the court of the Safavid Shah Abbas I, following the latter's conquest of Gilan and other Caspian provinces in 1000/1592. Later, Jahangir returned to Rustamdar, but he was arrested by the local lieutenant of Shah Abbas I, who had led a large force against him. Jahangir was sent to Qazwin, where he was executed in 1006/1598.'

The Safavid king Abbas I (d. 1038/1629) had tolerated Sufism in Iran with the exception of the Nuqtawiya sect. Their leading leader, Khusaro was tied by the neck to a camel's saddle and dragged along the streets of Qazwin in 1000/1592. In the ensuing wave of persecution and mass killing, a large number of the leading Nuqtawiya leaders were slain in 1002/1594 in Kashan, Ispahan, Istahlanat in Fars and Qazwin. Their another leader, called Yousuf was stripped from the garb of life and fell from the seat onto the mortuary board. The fate of another prominent leader, Suleman Sawuji, a physician from Sawa, was put to death and the king Abbas I regarded his elimination equal to a pilgrimage to Mecca. Likewise, Mir Sayed Ahmad Kashani was arrested in the village of Nasrabad in the vicinity of Kashan, was cut in half by king's own sword. Since the followers of Nuqtawiya sect thickly populated in the villages of the Ismailis, and were also collaborated with each other, it it possible that the Ismailis had taken necessary measures to ward off the hovering danger.

In Syria, the inroads of the bigoted Nusairis recurred on the Ismaili villages in 999/1591, and pillaged their properties. This time, the Ismailis repelled the band of Nusairis from their territories with their own resources.

It deserves notice, however, that the Nimatullahi order of Sufism also surfaced out in Iran. It was founded by Amir Nuruddin Nimatullah Kirmani, who traced his descent from Ismail bin Jafar Sadik. He was born in 730/1328 in Aleppo, and died in 834/1431 at Mahan in Kirman. Shah Nimatullah designated his son Burhanuddin Khalilullah (d. 860/1456), who migrated to Deccan for ever, but left his son Shamsuddin at Mahan to supervise the affairs of the Iranian followers. Nimatullahi order thus, existed both in Iran and India under two leaderships. Owing to the rigid religious policy of the Safavids between 906/1501 and 995/1588, the detail of the order is not accessible. It was not an hereditary order, but continued under different saints.

Shah Tahmasp II, the son of Shah Hussain ascended in 1134/1722 at Qazwin. He fled to Tabriz when Qazwin was shakened by the Afghans. The people of Qazwin repelled the Afghans. Mahmud however put to death many high officials and nobles, notably 3000 Kizilbash guards; cracking down the very backbone of the Safavid military. Thus suddenly was the whole fabric of the Safavid kingdom, bringing to an inglorious end. Mehmud was overthrown by his 26 years old cousin, called Ashraf in 1137/1725. At the time of his accession, Ashraf found himself in possession of Ispahan, Persian Irak, Fars, Kirman, Sistan, Qummis and western Khorasan. Shah Tahmasp II was the ruler of Qazwin and Mazandaran. In 1141/1729, Ashraf attacked the Safavids, but was defeated by Nadir Quli Beg, or Nadir Shah of Khorasan, the Safavid commander. He took possession of Ispahan and reinstated the Safavid monarchy by placing Shah Tahmasp II on the throne. Nadir then also drove away the Abdalis of Khorasan, and at last, he was made the chief commander of the Safavid military. These were the first outward signs that the tide had at last turned in Tahmasp favour, but a great deal had yet to be done.

In 1144/1732, just over two and a half years after Shah Tahmasp II had mounted the throne as a result of the restoration of the Safavid monarchy, he was forced by Nadir to abdicate in favour of his infant son Abbas III. Hence, Shah Tahmasp II spent the remainder of his unhappy and frustrated life in captivity. In 1148/1736, Shah Tahmasp II was joined by his son Shah Abbas III in prison when Nadir deposed him and captured the throne himself. Four years later, Shah Tahmasp II and his two sons Shah Abbas III and Ismail were put to death. Thus, Nadir Shah proclaimed the foundation of the Afsharid dynasty in 1148/1736.

Shah Ismail (1500-1524) had established the Safavid empire in Iran in 905/1500, which came to an end in 1148/1736 after a rule of about 236 years, from the time of Imam Abuzar Ali (d. 915/1509) to Imam Abul Hasan Ali (d. 1206/1792).

Imam Kassim Ali remained as a governor of Kirman for some times, and he came to Mahallat in 1204/1790. In Mahallat, he purchased many estates for his family, where he was very popular. In Mahallat, it is related that the Imam frequently arranged convivial parties at his residence. He used to invite the nobles and officials on every year during the celebrations of Eid-i Ghadir and Navroz. He died in Mahallat in 1143/1730 and was buried there. He had many sons, but the prominent among them were Abul Hasan Ali, the successor and Mirza Muhammad Bakir.

It must be noted that the first important move in the study of Ismailism had appeared in Europe in 1697, with the posthumous encyclopaedic work of a French scholar, Barthelemy d'Herbelot de Molainville (1625-1695). He was more accurately able to identify the Ismailis in Europe.

It appears that the Ismaili ruler of Gilgit, Raja Trakhan (1310-1335) was succeeded by Raja Somul (1335-1390). The third ruler was Raja Khusaro Khan (1390-1435), then Raja Hyder Khan (1435-1480), Raja Chalis Khan (1480-1515) and Raja Nur Khan (1515-1565). It means that the Ismailis ruled Gilgit absolutely for about 255 years. But, the seventh ruler Raja Mirza Khan (1565-1600) was invaded by Ali Sher Khan Anchan (1595-1633), the ruler of Skardu. Raja Mirza Khan took flight to Baltistan and lived as a refugee with the Maqpon ruler, Raja Ghazi Mir (1565-1595), who had died a month later. Raja Mirza married to the daughter of the ruler, and became a Twelver. He took field against Gilgit with colossal means and materials he acquired from the new ruler, Raja Ali Sher Khan (1600-1632), and subdued Ali Sher Khan Anchan at Gilgit, and reinstated his rule. Henceforward, he forced the inhabitants to follow the doctrines of the Twelver. The Ismailis observed strict taqiya, and were also known as the Mughli.
Imam Khalilullah Ali I died at Kahek in 993/1585, but he was buried in Anjudan. It seems that the Ismailis were thickly populated in Anjudan, therefore, it was resolved to settle few families in Kahek in Kirman. According to another tradition, the Twelvers and Nuqtawiyas also lived in Anjudan and its locality, therefore, the governor of Hamdan had appointed a certain Shia leader, called Sayed Khalilullah as the amir of Anjudan after Imam's departure from the village in 992/1584. An epigraph discovered by Farhad Daftary at Anjudan is allegedly collated with the preceding move. It reproduces the text of a royal edict issued by Shah Abbas II in Rajab, 1036/March-April, 1627 addressing to amir Khalilullah Anjudani, for the exemption of certain taxes, wherein the Anjudani Shias are explicitly regarded as the Twelvers. Farhad Daftary however identifies Amir Khalilullah Anjudani as Imam Zulfikar Ali, who was also known as Khalilullah. The balance of arguments points that it is almost a tentative speculation, and nothing to do with historical fact.

It is worth mentioning that the 'Tarikh-i Alfi' (the Millennial History) was compiled in India by several authors at the request of Mughal emperor Akbar in 1000/1592, whose one part was chronicled by Jafar Beg Asif Khan (d. 1021/1612), describing a rebellion hatched by a certain Murad under the year 982/1575 and the domineering of the Ismailis in Anjudan by Shah Tahmasp (d. 984/1576). More details of the same episode is described under the year 981/1574 by the Safavid historian, Qadi Mir Ahmad Munshi al-Qummi (d. after 1015/1606) in his 'Khulasat al-Tawarikh' (1st vol., pp. 582-4). Both sources relate that a certain Murad had numerous followers also in India, sending him large sums of money from Sind and Makran. Murad was engaged in political turmoil outside Anjudan, having acquired supporters in Kashan and elsewhere in Central Iran. Being alarmed by his activity, early in 981/1574, Shah Tahmasp ordered the Kizilbash governor of Hamdan, Amir Khan Mawsil'lu, to take field against Anjudan and arrest Murad. Amir Khan executed a bulk of the Ismailis in Anjudan and its locality and took much booty from them, but Murad, who was stayed at a fortress in the district of Kamara near Anjudan, managed to escape. Soon afterwards, Murad had been arrested and imprisoned near the royal quarters. In Jamada II, 981/October, 1573, Murad escaped from prison with the help of Muhammad Muqim, a high Safavid official who had come under Murad's influence. Murad fled to the vicinity of Kandhar, getting help on the way from his followers in Fars, Makran and Sind. A few months later, he was arrested in Afghanistan by the Safavid guards. He was brought before Shah Tahmasp, who had him executed along with Muhammad Muqim.

Farhad Daftary bluntly hazards to identify above certain Murad with Imam Murad Mirza (d. 920/1514), which seems that he is explicitly divorced from reality. The most important aspect of the story which deserves serious treatment is the stark difference between these two persons for about 60 years. Secondly, it is neither warranted in the Ismaili traditions, nor there is a single example, connoting the Imams to have involved in the political arena while living in Anjudan, and therefore, the alleged rebellion of the Imam Murad Mirza is highly doubtful. Thirdly, it would be absurd to believe that the Imam Murad Mirza had vainly stirred up a revolt with handful supporters and fled, putting behind his followers into the millstone of cruelty in Anjudan. Fourthly, the remittance of religious dues to the Imams by the Indian followers was an practice in vogue, which can be incorporated to suit the notion of any anecdote for the Ismailis. Fifthly, the above story places the rebellion in 982/1575, which is veritably the period of Imam Khalilullah Ali (957-993/1550-1585), the last Imam of Anjudan era. We would, however, venture the opinion that the whole story embodies elegance and rhetoric rather than a factual picture, and that Mirza in the story was in reality the leader of the Nuqtawiya sect in the time of Imam Khalilullah. He mustered a handful supporters for engineering a ground of rebellion against the Safavids. The followers of the Nuqtawiya were inhabited in the vicinity of Anjudan, and their uprising under their leader, Murad cannot be attributed to the Ismailis. It seems unlikely, therefore, that Imam Murad Mirza was that of a rebellious Murad.

It must be added on this juncture that several extremist movements with Shiite tendencies sprouted in Iran. For instance, the Hurufi movement was founded by a certain Fazalullah Astrabadi (740-796/1340-1394) in about 780/1378. His followers became known as Hurufis due to emphasizing the hidden meaning of the letters (huruf). Anatolia was the main foothold of the Hurufism. Later on, the Hurufism vanished in Iran, and several petty groups split off from it, notably the Nuqtawiya. It was founded by Mahmud (d. 831/1428) around 800/1398, who was the disciple of Fazalullah Astrabadi in Gilan. Mahmud taught to his followers the significance of the point (nuqta) as the building brick of his symbolical system. Thus, his group became known as the Nuqtawiya (pointism) and his followers as the People of the Point (ahl-i-nuqta). The Nuqtawiya gradually found their foothold in the Caspian region and the villages of Qazwin, Kashan, Ispahan and Shiraz. Mahmud died in 831/1428 on the border of Azerbaijan and Arran. His followers however continued his mission in Iran and India.

Our sources as cited above also relate a revolt under the year 983/1576 by the followers of Mahmud against the Safavids in the village surrounding the city of Kashan. This major revolt occurred in conjunction with an uprising in Anjudan led by the Nuqtawiya leader, called Murad. 'Tarikh-i Alfi' admits specifically that the revolt stirred in Anjudan by Murad was that of the Nuqtawiya order.

We also find a vogue tendency in the Iranian sources to conflate the Hurufis and Nuqtawiya wrongly with the Ismailis. The instance of an Ismaili poet, Kassim Amiri is ample in this contex, who was lynched in 999/1591. He is considered erroneously as the follower of the Nuqtawism in the Iranian sources. Ahmad bin Nasrullah Qadizada Tatawi, whose father had taken part in suppressing the Kashan revolt, was vague about the connection between the two revolts, suggesting explicitly that the followers of Mahmud were collaborating with the Ismailis of Anjudan, vide 'Nuqtawiyan ya Pisikhaniyan'(Tehran, 1941, p. 36) by Sadik Kiya.

The balance of argument tends to show in concluding this critique that Imam Murad Mirza had nothing to do with the above rebellion of the Nuqtawiya.

Lack of material does not enable us to give a detailed account of the Ismaili influence after the death of Shah Tahir Hussain Dakkani on 956/1549 in Ahmadnagar, India. We do not have explicit details, whether his descendants continued the Ismaili mission in the cloak of Shiism or not. There are however certain indications that a lady ruler, named Chand Bibi was secretly an Ismaili, but her faith is shrouded in her political activities. She was born in 957/1550 and died in 1006/1599, which implies that she was the contemporary of both Hyder bin Shah Tahir (d. 994/1586) and Sadruddin Muhammad bin Hyder (d. 1032/1622). Her father was Hussain Nizam Shah of Ahmadnagar, and mother was Khonza Humayun. Chand Bibi got married to Ali Adil Shah (1558-1580) of Bijapur at the age of 14 years in 970/1562. Ali Adil Shah was killed in 988/1580 when she was about 28 years old. She had no child, therefore, the nephew of her late husband aged 10 years, Ibrahim Adil Shah I was crowned in Bijapur, and herself ruled as a regent with great prudence and intelligence till the young king came of age. When order was restored in Bijapur kingdom, Chand Bibi went back to her motherland Ahmadnagar when she was about 35 years old. When Murtada Shah, the ruler of Ahmadnagar died at a moment when the foreign relations of the state were strained to breaking-point and was imminent, she returned to Bijapur, and mustered some reliable troops in consideration of the defence of Ahmadnagar fort against the mighty army of the Mughals led by their able general.
It was a question of saving the whole Deccan from Mughals, so Bijapur and Golconda kingdoms sent contingents. The Mughal force commanded by Prince Murad (d. 1007/1599) took field against Ahmadnagar. The three tunnels were dug in the fort, two of them were discovered and the third one was repaired in a night. At length, the Mughals were severely repulsed. Murad was compelled to negotiate truce, and recognized the rule of Ahmadnagar. It was the first time that Ahmadnagar was recognized by the Mughals out of the five states of Deccan. Accordingly, the Birar was to be retained with the Mughals and Ahmadnagar would rule independently. After this great defence, Chand Bibi came to be known as Chand Sultana. After some times, once again the opponents of Chand Bibi made approach to Prince Daniel (d. 1013/1604), the third son of emperor Akbar, who attacked Ahmadnagar with 30,000 men, and a terrible fight took place in the plain of Sonipat near the bank of Godawari river. The Mughals succeeded to turn the troops of Chand Bibi and had a siege over Ahmadnagar in 1008/1599. This time, emperor Akbar himself rushed to Deccan and pitched his tents outside the city. Chand Bibi became desperate and resisted the Mughal attacks with such courage that the invaders were repelled at many places. At length, Hamid Khan, the traitor allowed the Mughal force to enter Ahmadnagar, and entered the palace of Chand Bibi to kill her. At that moment of disaster, Chand Bibi came out of her apartments and fought bravely and was killed, and thus, Ahmadnagar was captured by the Mughals in 1009/1600.

Sayed Dadu, or Pir Dadu was an acclaimed and gifted vakil in Sind. He traced his descent from a well-known vakil, Bawa Hashim, who was one of the attendants of Imam Islam Shah in Kahek. Bawa Hashim's son Gul Muhammad was the man who had arranged a meeting of Sayed Imam Shah with the then Imam. Gul Muhammad, known as Harichandra in Indian orbits, had a son, Mahr al-Din, known as Moriya. His son was Khair al-Din, known as Kherraj. His son was Aasar, known as Jesar. Aasar had three sons, viz., Aas al-Din, Jamr al-Din and Daud, known as Dadu, or Pir Dadu, who was born about in 879/1474. He visited Anjudan when he was 80 years old, where Imam appointed him his vakil for Sind and Kutchh in 961/1554.
Culling up the fragment of traditions, it seems that in accomlishing their mission with the maximum impact, the Ismaili dais in India had lowered the linguistic and cultural barriers to conversion to great extent. What was commonly known in India that the term Khoja designated not religious identity, but affiliation to a caste of petty traders. Neither the orthodox Muslims nor Hindus would claim the Khoja Ismailis as co-religionists. The mixed character of Khoja Ismailis' rituals and the Hindu elements in their society was such an index by which the Islamic character among them became hard to judge at that time. Their reverence towards the first Imam Ali, the commemoration of the event of Karbala however placed them among the Shiite Muslims, while the tributes they offered to the Iranian Imams signified their affiliation to the Nizari Ismaili branch. In matter of marriages and funeral ceremonies, they had to knock the door of the Sunni mullas. In consideration of these conditions, Pir Dadu had laid much emphasis in enhancing the sense of their belonging in Islam, and tried to define a sharp position of the Khoja Ismailis. He first reviewed the religious practices for the first time after Pir Sadruddin with the instructions of Khalilullah Ali. He also revised the old daily prayer (dua), and removed the old unnecessary practices and ginans. With a fresh mandate, he also conducted a brisk mission activities and converted a large number of Lohana tribe of Hinduism, notably the family of Khoja Bhaloo (d. 1016/1607) in 961/1554.

The early Sumra rulers in Sind were the Ismailis, but the later Sumra adhered Sunnism. The Sumra dynasty in Sind ended almost before 762/1361. Henceforward, the local feudal chiefs descended from the Sumra rulers were also known as the Sumras among the Sunnis. Pir Dadu arrived in Sind in 961/1554 and resided at Fateh Bagh. When he came in Sind, Shah Hasan the last ruler of the Arghun dynasty had died in 961/1554, and a certain Mirza Essa Khan Trakhan took the reign of Sind.

In Fateh Bagh, the local chief Muhammad Sumaro was deadly against the Ismailis, whom he used to grind under the millstone of cruelty. He therefore violently persecuted Pir Dadu. Under the vehement agitation of the bigoted Qadi, Aas al-Din and Jamr al-Din, the brothers of Pir Dadu were arrested, paraded in the streets and beheaded. Pir Dadu's life was also insecure, therefore he immediately wrote to Jam, the ruler of Jamnagar in Kutchh for seeking refuge, which had been granted. At length, he repaired to Jamnagar with forty families in 994/1587 along with the sons of his brothers, where he was feted honours. Soon afterwards, another batch of forty to fifty families was also invited from Sind. A plot of land near the town was assigned to them, which had been fortified with walls, one of its gate is still known as Dadu's Gate.

Pir Dadu then reported to have moved to Bhuj, the capital of Kutchh in the reign of Rao Bharmal I (1585-1631). He procured cordial ties with the local ruler, and continued his mission in Kutchh and sent his representative in other parts of India. He also visited Kathiawar, where he converted a bulk of the Hundu Lohana tribe. Pir Dadu died at the age of 120 years in 1005/1596 at Bhuj, where his mausoleum still exists. The Imams continued to appoint the subsequent vakils in the descendant of Pir Dadu. The best known among them was Sayed Sadik, who had visited Iran, and had been consigned the office of vakil for Kutchh. His grandsons were twin born and were named Bawa Saheb al-Din and Bawa Salam al-Din. The former preached in Halar, Sind and the latter remained active in Kutchh.