Asia and Southeast Asia in this process of Islamicisation. In South Asia we find the society mainly integrated under Hinduism and in Southeast Asia society was integrated variously according to different ethnic groups and ecologies. S. Kumar pointed out the close relation of merchants with Sufism in South Asia and this point awaits further studies.In ConclusionIn this symposium we examined the issues concerning Indianisation of Southeast Asia and Islamicisation of the state and society in South Asia and Southeast Asia and were able to understand better the formation of pre-modern states and societies in both the regions and also the cultural and economic interactions between these two important Asian regions. In the past, studies were focused on the similarity in states and societies between these two regions, which is thought to have been caused by the introduction of Indian culture into Southeast Asia, but in this symposium for the first time discussions were about and able to clarify the differences between the two regions to a certain extent. This is the main achievement of this symposium.However, many important aspects of the interaction remain yet to be clarified. In Southeast Asia there were the regional differences deriving from diverse ecologies and ethnic groups, which created differences in the state formation and social integration and also in the acceptance of Indian traditional culture as well as Islam, though we can notice the ‘convergence’ in the early stage of state formation on both sides of the Bengal Bay. However, in Southeast Asia, the non-acceptance of some aspects of Brahmanical ideology and caste system with which Indian society was basically integrated, gave the former state individual features in structure and social integration, thus creating a difference between the two regions. For further clarification of these points we have to additionally study the formation of various states and the social integration in both the regions and examine their pre-modern development in general from a broader point of view covering various regions in Asia and beyond.Session 1The State and Society in the Islamicate World (13th–16th Centuries)Transitions in the Relationship between Political Elites and Sufis under the Delhi SultanatesSunil KUMAR(Professor, Department of History, University of Delhi, India)My paper draws attention to the teachings of two Sufi saints, Nizam al-Din Auliya from the turn of the thirteenth century and Gesu Daraz from the turn of the fourteenth. These were two sufi saints who belonged to the mystical fraternity described as the Chishtis, arguably one of the more famous schools of mystical instruction in South Asia. One important reason why I chose to study these two preceptors is because of their temporal location; they flourished during critical junctures of the Delhi Sultanate̶The late thirteenth century, the years of its greatest glory on the one hand, and on the other, the early fifteenth century, the decades of its political fragmentation.I have, however, chosen to study these two preceptors not just because they cover a con-venient historical time span; there is also an extremely rich textual tradition that surrounds them. The disciples of these two saints produced valuable textual compilations of their teachings that were described as malfuzat or ‘table-talks’. A 054MODERN ASIAN STUDIES REVIEW Vol.5