Advent of Guru Gobind Singh Ji:
Emancipatory Basis of the Sikh Struggle

Jagjit Singh*

* J-91, Patel Nagar, Ghaziabad, U.P. Eminent author and thinker. This is excerpted from his book: “The Sikh Revolution” (1981) published by Kendriya Singh Sabha, Amritsar.

An important goal of the Sikh movement was to fight the religious and political domination of the Mughal rulers which threatened to undermine the very moral fabric of the society. This mission was a part and parcel of the Sikh thesis which stood for the total emancipation of man, including freedom from political and religious dictation. But the Sikh movement was not a negative movement. It was not guided by the mere impulse of fighting Mughal domination, though this aspect naturally came more into the limelight because this was a prerequisite for gaining its positive ends. The second goal of the Sikh movement was intimately linked with its third goal that the downtrodden masses should be the masters of their own political destiny. As such, the Sikh armed struggle cannot be understood without taking into consideration its overriding egalitarian objectives. The Sikh movement, in its aim and character, was plebian in the broad sense of the term. For, it stood for the social and political rights of the downtrodden people. But, the word plebian should not at all bear the connotation of class hatred or class war; for this would be opposed to the Sikh thesis which is fundamentally based on universal love. God pervades all hearts and there is nothing that is intrinsically or permanently bad. All fights against is to be based on love in its comprehensive sense and not on hatred. It is a historical fact that the Sikh code of war did not permit attacking a person who had laid down his arms, or one who became a fugitive from the battlefield. ‘It is true they seldom kill in cold blood or make slaves.’1 The aim was to bring the erring person or persons on the right path. Forgiveness is one of the virtues on which great stress is laid in Sikhism. But this does not mean that if persons, groups or governments do not desist from their evil course, they are not to be fought against and are to be allowed a free run to harm the society. The ultimate good of the society as a whole is the criterion for judging all social action.

Empowerment:Revolutionary changes in social, political or economic system can rarely, if ever, be brought about without using force. And power in the final analysis means political and military power. The Gurus wanted to bring about revolutionary changes. It was for this purpose that Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa in order to capture political power for a plebian mission. He did not depend upon the privileged castes or class to bring this about. He wanted the downtrodden, degraded and despised sections of the society to work out their own destiny. As it is an important issue, we refer to the original evidence in some detail.

Samarth Ram Das, the preceptor of Shivaji, met Guru Hargobind and questioned him: “You are wearing arms and keeping an army and horses. You are yourself called Sacha Padshah – A true King. What sort of a Sadhu are you?” Guru Hargobind said: “Internally a hermit, and externally a prince; arms mean protection for the poor and destruction for the tyrant.”1a Here the Guru links the arming of the Panth distinctly with a plebian purpose. This piece of testimony is very important because the meeting of the Guru and Ramdas is confirmed by a Maratha source.1b

The overt military action of the Sikh movement against the rulers started when the Sikhs captured the hawk of Emperor Shah Jahan and refused to surrender it. Referring to this incident, Guru Hargobind, according to Gurbilas, said:

       ‘I will not give the hawk to them;

       (I will) get crown and hawk from them.

       I will wrest from them the sovereignty of the country;

       I will bestow this all on the poor and the helpless.’2

In the words of Koer Singh, when Guru Gobind Singh requested the five Beloved Ones to baptize him, he addressed them to the following effect:

       ‘Hear, Khalsaji, with all attention,

       You are dearest of dear to me.

       The Brahmins were proud that God had given the sovereignty of the world to them,

       There was no ruler (Raja) like them in world.

       The Rajput felts that they had been created from God’s arms.

       But, Vaishya, Sudras and Jats in large numbers I have incorporated in the Panth.

       The sovereignty of the whole world is given to you, the Khalsa,

       I have made you leaders of the Khalsa,

       The way you received Amrit (baptism) from the Guru,

       I wish to receive it the same way from you.

       The Guru and the Sikh are interwoven with one another,

       It had been so recognized by the nine Gurus.

       The Sikh and Guru are related to each other as head is to the body.’3

Here the conferment of political sovereignty on Vaishyas, Sudras and Jats is directly contrasted by the Guru with the Brahmanical scheme of reserving ruling power in the hands of ruling castes, the Brahmins and the Rajputs. So, there can be no doubt that the Guru’s plan was a direct reversal of the Brahmanical caste scheme, both in its social and its political aspects.

The Guru told the Brahmins, who had earlier boycotted the baptism ceremony of the Khalsa but later agreed to join it: ‘If you still persist in creating difficulties, you will have no place of honour in the Panth, who is now gong to be the ruler.’4

Guru Gobind Singh then sent for the hill Rajas and addressed them as follows:

       ‘You adopt the ways of the Khalsa;

       You have agreed to pay tribute to the Turks (Mughals);

       And regard yourselves as subordinates of the Turks.

       Come under the protection of the Khanda, the banner of the Khalsa;

       Overturn the Mughal authority.

       Lest you should complain afterwards that

       I have discriminated against you,

       I have sent for you so that you may follow the leadership of the Khalsa.’5

Transformation: This part of the text makes it clear that the Guru invited the hill Rajas to join the struggle against the Mughals, but on the condition that they accepted the objectives of the Khalsa. He wanted them not as allies, who retained their caste and feudal ideology, but asked them first to accept the mission of the Khalsa. That is why the Guru asked them to learn at the feet of the Khalsa (‘Tuj ko Khalsa charni laiya’) in order to imbibe the Khalsa ideology and, thus, come to have common purpose and aims.

The reaction of the hill Rajas to the Guru’s proposal is quite revealing. They replied:

       ‘You have welded four castes into one;

       How can we dine together with the four castes?

       How can your Panth get Raj?

       How can goats kill a tiger?

       Some do agriculture;

       Some deal in merchandise;

       Some are the despised castes of the foot-hill plains.

       How can these wrest from us our Raj? People will laugh at this idea.

       It is a preposterous idea that the twelve high castes should join the seven low castes.’6

For the hill Rajas it was simply unthinkable that they should have social equality, or make common cause, with the low castes, or that these low castes could ever succeed in getting Raj. In response to the reaction of the hill Rajas, the Guru said:

       ‘I am pleased with the sparrows (the Khalsa, most of whom were drawn from the low castes);

       These sparrows will kill many hawks.

       If I make the sparrows humble the hawks

       Then alone shall I be satisfied.’7 

This revolutionary aim appeared an impossible task to achieve not only to the hill Rajas, but also to some later historians, who wonder how Guru Gobind Singh could conceive of it. The author of Haqiqat wrote, ‘At that time Teg Bahadur very often spoke in the words of a mad man… As for example, the Sikh were told: “Now it seems, rather, it is ordained that the hawks must be hunted by the sparrows”; that is, disgrace will reach the nobles from the lowly tribes and this the disciples regarded as a glad tidings for them.’7a

‘Khlasa is the army of God’, 8 and ‘Khalsa is one who takes care of the poor’.9 As such, it became its duty to fight the oppressor. ‘Khalsa is one who fight in the forefront’.10 The plebian cause and the duty of the Khalsa to fight for it are thus made inseparable.

Guru Gobind Singh is said to have addressed Bhai Nand Lal to the following effect:

       ‘Listen, Nand Lal, to this plan:

       It will bring into being our Raj.

       I shall weld four castes into one;

       I shall make people remember God.

       The Khalsa under this plan, will ride horses and sport hawks;

       The Turks will run away on seeing them.

       It will make one man fight a lakh and a quarter;

       He who dies (fighting) will be liberated…

       The drums will beat at every door-step…

       The Khalsa will be victorious from one end to the other.

       The Khalsa will rule; no one will remain unsubdued.

       Everyone will join the Khalsa. For, they alone would be saved, who submit to the Khalsa.’11

A revolutionary’s fulfillment lies when he feels himself equal to the heaviest odds ranged against him. (‘Sava lakh se ek laraoon’), and a plebian revolution, by its very nature, involves every hamlet in its whirlwind sweep (‘Duar duar par naubat vaje’).

There is a poetic composition of the eighteenth century by one Bhai Gurdas. He writes:

       ‘He (Guru Gobind Singh) created his own Khalsa Panth and blessed it with great vigour,

       Khalsa, with hair on their heads, and sword in their hands, crushed all the tyrants.

       Nobody stood his ground against them;

       The Sirdars (chief) fled before them,

       Rajas, kings and the wealthy were reduced to dust,’12

It is significant that this verse brackets the wealthy with the Rajas, kings and Sirdars as the opponents of the Khalsa.

Ratan Singh Bhangu, in his introduction to his history of the Sikh Panth, says that the rulers are like tigers and hawks, and the subjects like goats and partridges, and that he is writing the story of ‘how goats killed tigers and the partridges killed hawks’.13 Bhangu further states:

       ‘Sovereignty cannot be had without armed struggle;

       The Guru initiated the armed struggle…..

       “The Guru gave sovereignty to the poor…, and

       The seven Sanat (lowest castes) and twelve low castes, who know nothing of politics.

       The world calls them rustic Jats, Bawas, Kiras, Khatris, Iron-smiths and carpenters of the low castes.

       The Guru showed benevolence to the despised calico printers, Kalals and the low-caste Gujars, Ahirs, Kambohs and Soods whom no one took into any account.

       The Guru thought that water-carriers, barbers, Aroras, potters, Saini, goldsmiths, sweepers (Chuhras), leather-workers,

       Bhats, Brahmins, beggars, Bahoroopias, Lubanas and potters – all downtrodden should be given sovereignty; they would remember the gift of the Guru.’14

Plebian Base: The Sikh movement had not only a plebian political mission, but it had also a plebian base. It was necessary that the down-trodden castes and classes should be both the architects and masters of their own destiny. When Guru Hargobind declared his intention of arming the Panth, four hundred men volunteered their services. ‘Calico-printers, water-carriers, and carpenter; Barbers, all came to (his) place.’15 The Muhammadan survivors of the battle of Lohgarh reported: ‘Although the Sikhs were of all castes and trades, they proved brave in battle, and the Imperial army was not to blame for its defeat.’16 The Subedar of Jullundur agreed to mount an expedition against Guru Hargobind, because ‘it was supposed that the few men the Guru had with him were a worthless rabble, since they had been enlisted from the dregs of the people. It was said that they consisted only of strolling singers, barbers, washermen, cobblers, and such like, who would disperse the moment they found themselves confronted with the regular troops.’17 Painda Khan deserted the Guru and told the Emperor that the Guru had no army. ‘Barbers, washermen, peddlers, strolling minstrels, and similar unwarlike people compose what he calleth his army.’18  

When asked by the Raja what kind of army Guru Gobind Singh had, Bhikhan Khan replied:

       ‘Subject people have come together; rustic Jats, oil-pressers, barbers, Bhati, Lubana, Leather-dressers. Many Banias, Aroras, Bhats, Sudras, Calico-printers, Jats, carpenters, twelve castes and Sanat (low castes) are joined; these are trained in the use of arrows. They include Kalals and goldsmiths, who do not know how to wield a spear.’19

Bhangu has referred to the plebian composition of the Khalsa at several places.20 When the Taruna Dal wing of the Khalsa Dal was reorganized into five divisions, one of the divisions was under the command of Bir Singh Rangreta.21 This divisions continued to participate in the campaigns of the Khalsa right up to the time of the conquest of Malerkotla.22 In the great battle with Abdali, called Wada Ghalughara because the largest number of Sikhs in a single battle were killed here, it is specially mentioned that Ramdasias (cobblers) and Rangretas took a prominent part.23

The plebian composition of the Khalsa is corroborated also by evidence from non-Sikh sources. Banda’s forces were recruited chiefly from the lower caste Hindus, and scavengers, leather dressers and such like persons were very numerous among them.24 The low-caste people who swelled Banda’s ranks are termed by a contemporary Muslim historian, as already quoted, as the dregs of the society of the hellish Hindus.24a Another contemporary Muslim writer says that Banda brought into the forefront the unemployed and worthless people who had hitherto been hidden by the curtain of insignificance.24b Khafi Khan says that ‘these infidels (Sikhs) had set up a new rule, and had forbidden the shaving of the hair of the head and beard. Many of the ill-disposed low-caste Hindus joined themselves to them, and placing their lives at the disposal of these evil-minded people, they found their own advantage in professing belief and obedience, and they were active in persecuting and killing other castes of Hindus.’25 

Cosmopolitan Struggle: The Sikh movement fought the rulers, who happened to be Muslims, but it was not anti-Islam or anti-Muslim. We have already seen that it was a cosmopolitan movement in its conception and inception. It was a movement for human freedom which embraced all sections of the society. It was Guru Gobind Singh who created the Khalsa to wage a relentless struggle against the religious dictation and political oppression of the Mughal rulers. His universal approach is clear from his hymns. “The temple and the mosque are the same; the Hindu worship and the Mussalman prayer are the same; all men are the same; it is through error they appear different.’35 We have also given instances earlier of Muslims who sided with the Guru in his battles against the Muslim rulers; not out of worldly considerations but because they considered his cause to be just. The Guru hailed Saiyad Budhan Shah as ‘a true priest of God’, meaning that he was serving the cause of God, and presented him (Budhan Shah) with his turban and comb which were preserved by his descendants as arelic till these were procured by the Chief of Nabha.’36

Not Clannish or Feudal: The Sikh armed struggle was not based on clannish, tribal, feudal or dynastic loyalties or ambitions either. Guru Gobind Singh was not interested in political power for himself.36a The only tribes from which a sizable number of Sikhs were drawn were the Jats. But, as they shed off their Jatism when they joined the Khalsa, the question of their retaining their original clannish and tribal ties did not arise. Brahmins, Khatries, Jats and low castes, the lowest of them, participated in the struggle, not as members of their original castes, but as members of the egalitarian Khalsa brotherhood. Unlike the Marathas, they were not held together by a regional nationalism. Of the five Beloved Ones, who formed the nucleus of the Khalsa leadership, one belonged to Hastinapur (U.P.), one to Dwarka (Saurashtra), one to Bidar (Karnataka) and one to Jagannath (Orissa).37 The Sikhs were cemented together by the ideology of the Khalsa. The Brahmins and Khatries who joined the Sikh ranks had no hesitation in bowing to the Masands many of whom were from the Jats.38 Everyone accepted the Jats, Kalals and Rangretas, the lowest caste, as one’s equal in the Khalsa Dal.

The leadership always went to the most deserving Sikh, irrespective of his caste or the size of his group. After the Gurus, the Jats accepted the leadership of non-Jats, first of Banda and then of Jassa Singh Kalal, a not much respected caste. Out of the five divisions of the Taruna Dal, Jats were commanders of only two.39 The commander of Sikh forces at the time of Chota Ghalughara was Sukha Singh, a carpenter.40 This tradition was so strong that even during the Misal period the leader of one of the Misals was one Jassa Singh, a carpenter. During the revolutionary period, there were rifts in the Sikh ranks on questions of principles, but there is not one instance of a division having taken place, or of even an argument having been advanced, on account of the distinctions of caste, clan or tribe. It is this egalitarian tradition which governed the development of the Sikh movement, which we have to consider.

q

References

1.    Qazi, Nur Muhammad; Jang Nama, pp 172-5; Forster, i. p. 321. Polier; E.E.A., p. 197; Gurbilas Chevin Patshahi, p. 458; Macauliffe, Vol. iv. p. 108; Vol. v, p. 125.

1a.  Sakhi 39, Pothi Panjab Sakhian, cited by Ganda Singh: The Panjab Past and Present, April 1979, . 241; Dabistan; for a similar elucidation by Guru Gobind Singh see Latif, p. 273.

1b.  Ibid, pp. 240-242.

2.    Gurbilas Chevin Patshahi, p. 293.

3.    Koer Singh: Gurbilas Patshahi Das, p. 131.

4.    Ibid., p. 134.

5.    Ibid, p. 137; Macauliffe, v, pp. 99-100.

6.    Ibid.

7.    Ibid.

7a.  Hakikat (Haquiqat), Indian Historical Quarterly, March 1942 Supplement, p. 5.

8.    Sarb Loh Granth, Part 3, p. 553.

9.    Rehatname, edited by Piara Singh Padam, p. 47.

10.  Ibid.

11.  Ibid.

12.  Bhai Gurdas, Var 41, Pauri 15.

13.  Bhangu, p. 19.

14.  Ibid, p. 41.

15.  Gurbilas Chevian Patshahi, p. 143.

16.  Macauliffe, iv., pp. 95-96.

17.  Ibid, p. 107.

18.  Ibid, p. 197.

19.  Koer Singh, p. 90.

20.  Bhangu, pp. 50. 58, 104, 236, 244, 262, 368.

21.  Ibid, p. 216.

22.  Ibid, p. 469.

23.  Ibid, p. 368.

24.  Irvine, W.: Later Mughals, pp 94,96, 98-99.

24a Fatuhat Namah-i-Samadi, p. 28, cited by Gurbax Singh: Punjab History Conference (proceedings), Dec. 15-16, 1973), p. 55.

24b. Asrar-i-Samadi, trans, in Punjabi, p. 7.

25.  Elliot and Dowson: The History of India as Told by its own Historians, Vol. VII, pp 419-420.

26.  Macauliffe, i, pp 238-240.

27. Janamsakhi Prampra, Antka, p. 174.

28.  Koer Singh, p. 132.

29.  Khushwant Rai cited by Randhir Singh in his introduction to Prem Sumarag Granth (edited by Randhir Singh), p. 24.

30.  Rehatname, edited by Piara Singh Padam, pp. 53, 59,60, 61,62, 64, 68,73.

31. Macauliffe, v, p. 147.

32.  Ibid., p. 157.

33.  Zafarnama: Macauliffe, v, p. 205.

34.  Macauliffe, v, p. 295.

35.  Ibid, p. 275.

36.  Ibid, pp. 45-46.

36a.      Koer Singh, p. 99; Bhangu, p. 41.

37.  Koer Singh, p. 129.

38.  Gupta, Hari Ram: History of the Sikh Gurus, p. 90; Dabistan, p. 233.

39.  Bhangu, p. 216.

40.  Ibid, pp. 316-319.