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.

Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah died on 940/1534 and was buried in the mausoleum of his father in Pirana, the necropolis of the Imam-Shahi sect. He had several sons, the oldest being Jalaluddin and Mustapha. Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah had however appointed one of his younger son as his successor, called Sayed Miran Khan, surnamed Sai'duddin. Several stories are recounted about the cruelty of the brothers of Sayed Miran Khan, who was exiled from Pirana. In sum, the shrine of Sayed Imam Shah remained in the custody of Jalaluddin and his descendants for about a century, while the pirs in the descent of Sayed Miran Khan were moving about the country. Sayed Miran Khan rambled as a successor of his father in Surat, Burhanpur and the towns of the Deccan.
Mention must be made on this juncture about the institution of the kakas in Imam-Shahi sect that had taken root in Pirana. This institution was the headman of the converted Hindus. The kaka was the Imam-Shahi cleric and his duty was to settle the petty disputes and collect religious taxes. This institution had been introduced at an early period in petty village communities, and then gradually penetrated into Pirana. The immediate cause of the final legalisation of the status of the kakas at Pirana was the rivalries and quarrels of the sons of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah, who is said to have introduced the tradition of the kaka (headman) to collect religious taxes and offerings. The kaka was appointed for life and had to take vow of celibacy and received food and clothing as remuneration. The number of the early prominent kakas was twenty-five, from Kaka Shanna to Kaka Lakhman. The institution of the kaka had a furtive character. For details, vide 'Pirana Satpanth'ni Pol' (Falsehood of the Satpanth of Pirana), by Patel Narayan Ramji Contractor, Rajkot, 1926.

After the exile of Sayed Miran Khan, the kaka began to dominate at Pirana in all affairs and proved to be an inexhaustible source of intrigue and misery to the community, which ultimately brought about the complete ruin of the Imam-Shahi sect. Most of the old literature of the ginans remained in possession of the kakas, who were responsible to interpolate them. It must be noted that the theory of equating Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad with Pir Shams was most probably floated in these interpolations. The word Pir and Imam also began to be added frequently in their ginans for Sayed Imam Shah and Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah. Many other terminologies of the Hindus and their deities were added in the ginans. Henceforward, Pir Satgur Nur was identified in their newly ginans attributed to the authorship of Sayed Imam Shah, with the Brahma, Sayed Imam Shah as the incarnation of Indra and Nur Muhammad Shah was exalted to a station equivalent to Vishnu. One legendary book had been compiled in the name of Sayed Imam Shah, namely 'Dashtari Gayatri', in which the genealogical details are mentioned, but no mention is made of the line of the Ismaili Imams. Another bombastic work was also created, entitled 'Chetamani of Pir Imam Shah' where the descent is however traced to 'Sayed Satgur Patra Brahma Indra Imam Shah' and 'Adi Vishnu Nirinjan Nur Ali Mahomed Shah.' Thus, they enjoyed considerable autonomy to institute a number of fictitious theories and ceremonials

Meanwhile, a deputation arrived to invite Sayed Miran Khan to Pirana, which he accepted and returned to his native place, where he died in 980/1572 and was succeeded by Sayed Abu Ali Hashim, who was hardly 12 to 13 years of age. It must be added that Sayed Saleh (984-1021/1576-1612), another son of Sayed Miran Khan is said to have a strong proclivity towards Ismailism, who also composed few ginans.

The shrine of Sayed Imam Shah was in charge of the descendants of Jalaluddin, therefore, Sayed Abu Ali Hashim had to procure a strong following in Pirana, who, at length took its charge and died in 1021/1612. He was succeeded by his 15 years old son, Abu Muhammad Hashim, who decided to renovate the graves of his father and grandfather and erect a splendid mausoleum for them, near the shrine of Sayed Imam Shah. Nur Shah, the son of Mustapha, the brother of Sayed Miran Khan, was at that time the official keeper of the shrine of Sayed Imam Shah. He and his brother, Walan Shah fiercely opposed the plan. Their opposition rose to armed obstruction and in a pitched battle between the two parties, the supporters of Nur Shah were defeated. The enmity and hatred between them were going on unabated, but the majority remained faithful to Abu Muhammad Hashim, who died in 1045/1636. He was succeeded by his 12 years old son, Muhammad, also known as Muhammad Shah Dula Burhanpur. He left Pirana and went to Burhanpur in Khandesh and left behind his son, Abu Muhammad Shahji Miran in Pirana. He however died in 1067/1657 and was buried in Burhanpur. His successor Abu Muhammad Shahji Miran came to a tragic end due to the intolerance of the Mughal emperor Aurengzeb. According to 'Mirat-i Ahmadi' (comp. 1174/1761), certain officials with an armed escort were sent to Pirana with the express summon of the emperor to arrest Shahji Miran. The sickly old man refused to go. Then, being dragged by force, he poisoned himself on the way to the city and died not far from Pirana, where he was brought back to be interred. This event took place in 1103/1692. His son and successor was 12 years old Sayed Muhammad Shah, who wandered from Burhanpur to Pirana and the towns of the Deccan, and died in Ahmadnagar in 1130/1718. His infant son, Sayed Muhammad Fazal Shah had been brought up for 12 years in Ahmadnagar.

Meanwhile, a deputation of 200 persons from Pirana was sent to Ahmadnagar to invite the young pir to come back. Hence, Sayed Muhammad Fazal Shah was taken to Pirana, where he was met with great pomp. He however gave up all hopes of settling in Pirana owing to the strong influence and foothold of the kakas, who were adamant. He therefore went to Champanir, where he died on 1159/1746. Sayed Sharif then succeeded, who returned to Pirana in 1885/1771, where his father had failed. In Pirana, he discovered that his life was insecure, therefore he tried to settle in Cambay, about 20 miles distant from Pirana. His temporary absence brought about some ugly development in Pirana. The kakas, by bribes, arranged with the local authorities to take hold of the old historical house of the pirs and pulled it down. When the news of sacrilege reached to Sayed Sharif, he rushed back, only to find that it was too late. Curses followed between them and the atmosphere of Pirana remained as tense as ever. The guardian of Sayed Imam Shah's shrine at that time was Karamullah bin Jafar, who gave his daughter to Sayed Sharif in marriage. Sayed Sharif however died in 1209/1795 and was succeeded by his son, Badruddin, also known as Bara Miyan. He continued the policy of his father to reduce the power of the kakas in Pirana. He also died in 1243/1827 and was succeeded by his son, Bakir Shah, the last pir of the Imam-Shahi sect in Pirana. He also died most probably in 1251/1835 without leaving any successor. Thus, the old line of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah (d. 940/1534) came to an end. The disciples of the Imam-Shahi sect are found in Ahmadabad, Kheda, Cambay, Baroda, Bhavanagar, Surat, Khandesh and Kutchh.

Previously, it is indicated that Humayun (1530-1556), the Mughal emperor, was dethroned by Sher Shah Suri (947-952/1540-1545) on May 17, 1540. Humayun led a life of homeless loitering in Sind for three years, and finally repaired to Iran in 1544 in the time of Shah Tahmasp. Humayun embraced Shiism in Iran, and with the help of the Safavids, he reinstated the Mughal empire in India in 962/1555 after fifteen years. The Indian Ismaili pilgrims, who visited Anjudan by road, seem to have been advised by Nuruddin Ali to travel by sea. It is possible that between 947/1540 and 962/1555, Sher Shah Suri had planted his agents in Sind to search Humayun, resulting the roads insecure between India and Iran for the travellers. Humayun embarked from Sistan with 12,000 horsemen in 952/1545 and seized Kandhar and Kabul. He also conquered Badakhshan in 954/1547, and then entered India and captured Delhi in 962/1555. It is also probable that the routes between Iran and Badakhshan were insecure from 952/1545 to 962/1555, therefore, Nuruddin Ali had also directed his followers in Badakhshan not to travel for Iran for few years.

One unknown manuscript of Iran of 929/1523 is unearthed, containing 24 quatrains in glorification of the Imam of the time, whose few couplets are given below:-

Pesh az man baaisam tuhi mowlana,
bi tu che tasrafum rasd dar du jahan.

'O'Lord! you existed before me, therefore you created
me.
What I may take away in the two worlds except to desire
for you.

Gar kohana wa gar navim ya mowlana,
bi rai'i to marqsada nadaarim digar.

'We may be either young or old, but there is no aim of
our lives without your remembrance.'

Aiy'i rahat baksh'i ruh ya mowlana,
har yad'i to mikunand dar alam'i showk.

'O'Lord! you are peace giver to the mankind. When love
gushes, the lovers remember your name.'

It seems possible that the above unknown poem belonged to the then known Ismaili poet Mahmud Ali, who hailed from Mominabad. Dr. Farhad Daftry has also discovered his poems from the Ismaili leaders in Khorasan, which have not been listed in 'A Guide to Ismaili Literature' (London, 1933) by W. Ivanow and in 'Biobibliography of Ismaili Literature' (California, 1977) by Ismail K. Poonawala. In his one long poem, Mahmud Ali names the Ismaili dais, mu'allims and lesser functionaries in numerous localities in Khorasan, Kohistan, Irak-i Ajam, Kirman, Afghanistan, Badakhshan, Turkistan and the Indian subcontinent, including Multan, Lahore and Gujrat.

Imam Nuruddin Ali consigned the office of Imamate to his son, Khalilullah Ali, and died in 957/1550 in Anjudan. The details of his other five sons are inaccessible.

The Ismailis in Kashmir, Punjab and Sind were ardent and fervent followers, but the mission in Gujrat suffered a setback due to the negative propaganda of Nur Muhammad Shah (d. 940/1534), the son of Sayed Imam Shah. He however had renounced his allegiance with the Iranian Imams, but it is doubtful that he had ever claimed Imamate for himself.
Among the Imam-Shahis, a theory had been cultivated, equating Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad with Pir Shams as one and the same person. This theory has it that Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad had abdicated the Imamate in favour of Imam Kassim Shah and himself took up the mantle of the Pir and started mission in India. This 'abdiction theory' is also sounded in the 'Satveni'ji Vel' of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah, which had been inserted in later period. The modern scholars curiously speculate that this theory was the creation of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah to legitimate his alleged claim to the Imamate that would have served his self-interest to endorse a genealogy, tracing his father back to the Ismaili Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad. It should be however noted that the 'Satveni'ji Vel' had been in private collection of the Imam-Shahis in Pirana, containing 200 stanzas with endless errors and interpolations, whose 150 stanzas were printed in 1906 at Bombay into Khojki script for the Ismailis. The remarks of the modern scholars in favour of the alleged claim of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah are based solely on the printed text of 1906.

W. Ivanow writes in his 'The Sect of Imam Shah in Gujrat' (JBBRAS, XII, 1936, p. 32) that, 'As he (Nur Muhammad Shah) surely could not pretend to be a son of an Imam, he had to invent a theory of his descent from the line of the Imams, and the coincidence in the names of his ancestors, (Pir) Shamsuddin, with the name of Shamsuddin the Imam, offered an easy opportunity.' Being inspired with the comment of W. Ivanow, Dr. Azim Nanji writes in 'The Nizari Ismaili Tradition in the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent' (New York, 1978, pp. 63-4) that, 'Since he (Nur Muhammad Shah) claimed to be an Imam, it was necessary according to standard Ismaili belief that he should want to establish a direct lineage from the Imams in order to authenticate his claims. By making Pir Shams and Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad one and the same person, and by claiming direct descent from Pir Shams, he could thus substantiate his own right to the Imamate.' In sum, it seems that the scholars have not gone through the 'Satveni'ji Vel' as thorough as required. The 'abdiction theory' making an Imam to degrade to the office of the Pir is the creation of later period, when a part of the ginans including 'Satveni'ji Vel' were in the possession of the kakas in Pirana, who were responsible to distort the ginans and inserted 'abdiction theory' to suit the flavour of their beliefs. It is therefore not justifiable to cultivate any doubtful idea for Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah, charging him to have incorporated such theory in his work to boost his alleged claims.

It is beyond the province of our study to evaluate the veracity of 'Satveni'ji Vel' of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah, but we will discuss the alleged claims in the light of the few verses derived from the printed text as under:-

'Both authorities of Imamate and Pirship were with Imam Shams' (78: 9)

'Shah Shams arrived in India and made his public appearance' (79: 1-2)

'Pir Shams then proceeded to Punjab after consigning Imamate to Kassim Shah. It was Samvat 1366 (1310 A.D.) when Kassim Shah assumed the Imamate. Hence, the office of the Pir was retained by Pir Shams and that of the Imamate by Kassim Shah' (94: 1-6)

It ensues from above verses that Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad had come to India, and when he intended to proceed to Punjab, he retinguished his office of Imamate to Kassim Shah, and retained the office of the Pir with him. In other words, Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad henceforth came to be known as Pir Shams in India. It however implies that the Imamate remained with Kassim Shah and his descendants, while the office of the Pir with Pir Shams and his descendants. It is therefore crystal clear to judge that any claim of Imamate being advanced in the descent of Pir Shams cannot be validated, since he was then not an Imam, but a Pir. According to the fundamental belief of the Ismailis that an Imam is the sole authority to commission any person in his absolute discretion to the post of Pir, and thus the 'Satveni'ji Vel' does not claim that Imam Kassim Shah had appointed or declared Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad as a Pir and therefore the 'abdiction theory' cannot be historically true, but it was the causation of the later Imam-Shahi kakas, whose beliefs used to be changed from time to time, who needed to interpolate the notion of the ginans.

While going through the old manuscripts of the ginans, one can find an indication that the original work of 'Satveni'ji Vel' should have been projected for 100 stanzas, dealing with the history of the Imams and the Pirs. It was compiled between 922/1516 and 926/1520 when Sayed Imam Shah (d. 926/1520) was most probably yet alive, therefore, it seems impossible that the 'abdiction theory' had been inserted to boost his alleged claim by Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah during the period of his father. There is another point to touch that Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah was admittedly well grounded in Ismaili history and known that an Imam should be the son of the Imam, therefore, his alleged claim to the Imamate is highly doubtful.

Sayed Imam Shah is said to have composed 'Moman Chetamani' in which he also admits that, 'Shamsuddin was the son of Pir Salauddin, who embarked from Tabriz, and he was Pir Shamsuddin to spread the religion' (no. 204). 'He showed Kassim Shah, the Lord of the age' (no. 362). Among the Imam-Shahis, the 'Jannat-nama' is a famous work of Sayed Imam Shah, which reads:- 'Recognize Pir Satgur Nur, who is (in the same authority) that of Salauddin, His son was Pir Shamsuddin and Pir Nasiruddin was from the latter.' (no. 77). It further ensues from these verses that the 'abdiction theory' did not exist in the time of Sayed Imam Shah and his son, but was coined in later period. It may be known that the original manuscript of the 'Satveni'ji Vel' is being unearthed to bring further light on the subject in near future.

It is further suggested that Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah had used the word nar for himself in the ginans to boost his alleged claim, which is another layer of confusion added in the modern sources. While dismissing this theory, we will have to seek the reasons. It has been observed that the reciters of the ginans used to pronounce the word nar instead of nur in many cases and gradually they found coherance in the two words, and seem to have ignored the distinction between them. They found striking parallels between these two words, and being Indians by origin, the reciters preferred to pronounce the Hindi word nar instead of the foreign word nur in many ginans.

The scrunity of the old manuscripts also throws a flood of light that the scribes had transmuted the word nur (light) for nar (Lord), resulting the rendering of Nur Muhammad Shah to Nar Muhammad Shah in the old manuscripts. The modern writers, without examining the transcriptional error, hazard to theorize that Nur Muhammad, an alleged aspirant to the office of the Imamate had claimed as nar (Imam) for himself. Given that he had applied the term nar for himself in his ginans, composed almost during his father's time, then it seems improbable that his claim originated when his father was alive. His extant ginans also do not sound to this effect a little likelihood. Summing up all these materials for evidence, it is worth stressing that the reliance on the key term, can do great injustice to its interpretation and even to larger tradition, and research must cross many barriers of old tradition and poor thinking in order to stand within another world view.

It is however certain that Nur Muhammad Shah had violated the communal disciplines, engendering the principal cause of the split after 926/1520, and he was the real renegade to have abjured Ismailism. In 'Manazil al-Aqtab', Nur Muhammad is made responsible for separating his followers from the main Ismaili stock. W.Ivanow writes on the basis of 'Manazil al-Aqtab wa Basati'nul Ahbab' (comp. 1237/1822) that a certain Mukhi Kheta was the head of 18000 converted Hindus during the time of Pir Hasan Kabiruddin. He was comissioned to collect religious dues in a tithe wallet (jholi) in Gujrat and send the accumulated funds back to the main treasury in Sind. Not only this practice followed during the time of Sayed Imam Shah, but it was carried on even under Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah himself. The tradition has it that immediately after the death of his father, Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah had ordered Mukhi Kheta that the accumulated funds of Gujrat should henceforth be deposited in Pirana, instead of being sent to Sind. Mukhi Kheta emphatically refused it, which was more likely a bone contention of the defection. The religious dues at that time was collected by the authorized vakils, and deposited at Sind, and thence the whole lot was to be remitted to Iran.

It seems that a large conversion had been resulted in the time of Sayed Imam Shah in Gujrat and Kathiawar, where Mukhi Kheta used to collect the religious dues since the time of Pir Hasan Kabiruddin, procuring there more funds than that of Kutchh, Sind and Punjab. It is therefore most probable to speculate that Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah had desired the main treasury to be shifted gradually from Sind to Pirana, so that he might use the funds at his liberty. It should also be noted that between the year 926/1520 and 931/1525, the tradition of venerating the shrines of the Sayeds had largely developed among the followers who had supported Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah. It also seems that he had planned to make Pirana a centre of veneration more attractive than that of Uchh in Sind. In pursuit, he naturally needed huge funds, which he could only generate from the main treasury, and that is why he desired to transfer it from Sind to Pirana. He however instructed his followers to deposit their religious dues and offerings in Pirana.

Mukhi Kheta seems to be a regular and faithful in his duties. In the absence of any official orders, he could not comply with the instructions of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah. Since Sind was near Iran than that of Pirana in making remittance of the whole funds to the Imam, therefore, it was immaterial to transfer the main treasury from Sind to Gujrat. In sum, the refusal of Mukhi Kheta and the opposition of Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah, had marred the relations of the Ismailis of Sind and Gujrat, and it was an early brick of the schism, making the Indian Ismailis bifurcated into the two branches, i.e., the Khojas Ismailis and the Imam-Shahis.

After being disappointed, Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah came up openly to misguide the Ismailis in India. All this had been brought to the notice of Imam Nuruddin Ali in Iran, who at once outcast him from the community with a express command, and instructed the faithful Ismailis to refrain from their association with the Sayeds of Pirana. Thus, Sayed Muhammad Shah and his followers defected from the Ismaili community, and laid the foundation of their own sect, known as the Imam-Shahis. The schism took place in the emotionally charged climate around 931/1525. W. Ivanow writes in 'The Sect of Imam Shah in Gujrat' (JBBRAS, XII, 1936, p. 45) that, 'The split, caused by Nur Muhammad Shah's pretentions, has done incalculable harm to his sect. Instead of being followers of Ismailism, the ancient and highly philosophical branch of Islam, with its great cultural traditions and the mentality of a world religion, they have become nothing but a petty community of 'Piranawallas', a kind of inferior Hindus, and very doubtful Muslims. Anyhow, orthodox Muslims do not regard them as Muslims, and orthodox Hindus do not regard them as Hindus.' In sum, the Imam-Shahi sect lost all its cultural elements and rapidly sank deeper and deeper, with no prospect of early regeneration. It is now a hodgepodge of Hindu and Islamic elements.

Bibi Khadija, the wife of Sayed Imam Shah seems to have played a seminal role in the schism. She extended her support to Nur Muhammad Shah and repudiated the recognition of the Imam in Iran. She seems to have declared Nur Muhammad Shah as the successor of Sayed Imam Shah and the dissociated group became known as the Imam-Shahis, making Sayed Imam Shah as the founder. She summoned Sayed Rehmatullah Shah, the son of Pir Hasan Kabiruddin at Pirana to win his support, but he refused to throw off his allegiance to the Imam in Iran. He stayed at Pirana for few months, and returned after marrying with a Sayed lady. It is recounted that Sayed Rehmatullah propagated among the Ismaili circles in India through his messengers that he had nothing to do with the Sayeds of Pirana. He also arranged to sent a large amount of religious dues through two persons in Iran. Khayr Khwah Herati (d. after 960/1553) also confirms the visit of two Indian Ismailis, the followers of Sayed Rehmatullah Shah, who had come to Khorasan on their way to search for the Imam to present religious dues, vide his 'Tasnifat', edited by W.Ivanow, Tehran, 1961, p. 54.

Sayed Rehmatullah is said to have visited Badakhshan and Anjudan and reported whole story to the Imam. He finally settled down in a village, called Kadi in Gujrat.

Hence, a large conversion of Sayed Imam Shah in Gujrat suffered a great reverse and the half-baked adherents of Islam were dragged into the most furious blasts of hostile winds. This alarmed a group of the adherents, inducing them to retrace their steps towards the fold of Hinduism, but most of them remained faithful to Ismailism. But, a major group in Pirana dissociated at the head of Nur Muhammad Shah, became known as the Imam-Shahis, who followed the mixed rituals of Islam and Hinduism, like Hussaini Brahmin, Shanvi and Bad Khwans. They propagated that the successor of Pir Hasan Kabiruddin was Sayed Imam Shah, who was followed by Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah. The schism also effected the Satpanth Literature, i.e., the ginans. It is most certain that the ginans of Sayed Imam Shah had been adjusted at Pirana to suit the flavour of the Imam-Shahis. The mainstream of the community, known as the Khojas in Sind, Kutchh, Kathiawar and Gujrat continued to adhere to the Imam, and protected the accumulated ginans to great extent from being interpolated.

Abul Kassim Muhammad Kuhpayai, known as Amiri Shirazi, or Kassim Amiri was a famous Ismaili scholar and poet. He was born possibly in 953/1545 in Kuhpayai, a village in the vicinity of Ispahan. He served Shah Tahmasp in the Safavid court for 30 years, then fell into disfavour. It is recounted in the native tradition that a court theologian, Hilli Hasan bin Yousuf aroused the king against him. Shah Tahmasp arrested him for alleged impeachment being an infidel, and blinded him in 973/1565. He was imprisoned in Shiraz, and was executed by Shah Abbas in 999/1591. He passed a tragic life, and none dared to quote or collect his poetical works. His poems are accessible almost disorderly, in which few historical events are composed, dating around 987/1579. In his 'Ash'ar-i Amiri', he eulogized Imam Murad Mirza and Imam Nuruddin Ali. It sounds from his poems that being an Ismaili, he had to face troubles, therefore, he had presented his religious feelings very carefully. Abu Baqi Nihawand writes in 'Ma'athir'i Rahimi' (Calcutta, 1931, 3rd vol., p. 1506) that the poems of Kassim Amiri were collected by his nephew Maulana Dakhli, who later on migrated to India.
The tradition of vakil in Hind and Sind was retained by Nuruddin Ali. The term vakil was a short form of vakil'i shah (vicegerent of the Lord) or vakil'i mawla (vicegerent of the Imam), and the term vakil'i nafs'i nafis'i humayun (vicegerent of the Imam in both his spiritual and temporal capacities) was used in Iran for the Indian hujjat, or pir. While in Badakhshan, the tradition of numainda (representative) had been retained, and the local chiefs were selected for the office. Nuruddin Ali began to appoint the vakil, numainda or hujjat from his family members, and the local chiefs were directed to work under them. This newly system gave a gravity to the Ismaili mission. The names of many other vakils in Central Asia are found without their biographies, and it is difficult to locate their periods.