RAS question
Akbar's policy of 'Sulh-i-Kul' (Peace with All) meant:
Correct answer: (A) Universal peace and religious tolerance irrespective of faith.
Akbar's policy of Sulh-i Kul meant peace with all, expressed as universal peace and religious tolerance irrespective of faith.
Explanation
Sulh-i Kul is defined in eGyanKosh (IGNOU), Unit 17: State and Religion as "Peace with All; Absolute Peace". In Akbar's rule, it was not a narrow diplomatic formula but the core of his religious outlook: religious goodwill, toleration, and the idea that religion should unite rather than become a pretext for conflict. Akbar treated religious strife as a basic cause of human misfortune and held Sulh-i Kul as a fundamental good. That is why option A is the best description: it captures universal peace and tolerance across faiths. The other options wrongly shrink the policy into external submission, a Rajput-only settlement, or a military arrangement with Persia.
Why the other options are wrong
- (B) Submission to the Ottoman Caliph is wrong because Sulh-i Kul was about peace and religious goodwill within Akbar's outlook, not accepting another ruler's religious authority.
- (C) Only peace with Rajputs is wrong because the policy was framed as peace with all and toleration across religious groups, not as a settlement with one community.
- (D) A military alliance with Persia is wrong because Sulh-i Kul described religious tolerance and harmony, not a foreign military pact.
Concept
This tests Mughal religious policy, especially the shift from orthodox pressure to Akbar's broader principle of toleration. It recurs in RAS because Akbar's religious policy is a standard medieval-history theme where options often confuse ideology, diplomacy, and military alliances.