Chapter 15

 

What the British Did to the Sikhs?

 

 

 

The British had studied the Sikh character for more than a century before declaring war on Sarkar-i-Khalsa (Khalsa Raj) ¾ the Sikh kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit singh. They were convinced that a Sikh’s drive to be independent and the spirit to fight for freedom is rooted in the theology of Aad Guru Granth Sahib:

 

“British observers noted that the martial prowess of the Sikhs stemmed from a religious impulse; for this reasons the British fostered the Khalsa identity over all others.”¹

 

However, contrary to this malicious propaganda the British tried every thing possible to Hinduize Sikhs by subverting Sikh theology and history. Therefore, in order to wean away Sikhs from the teachings of AGGS, they took control of Gurdwaras and appointed Hindu mahants and pujaris to Hinduize Sikhism:

 

For instance, in the first two decades after Punjab’s annexation, the colonial government of India, as part of its general policies, insisted that the administration relinquish its control over Sikh shrines like the Golden Temple; at the same time the British army was furthering its image of Sikh identity and employing Sikh granthis, and the provincial administration in Punjab was pressing to retain control over major Sikh shrines. Moreover, evangelical district officers like R. Cust, confident that Sikhism was on the decline, were simultaneously drafting policies to push it towards its final demise. Such conflicts over policy remained an inherent feature of British rule. It was not at all easy for one institution of the state to alter the thinking of another organ of imperial rule.²

 

Unlike Bengal, Madras and Bombay, where officials were somewhat wary of evangelical activities, in Punjab they were not assailed by doubt. Robert Cust, who had been associated with Punjab administration since 1846 and moved on to be a judicial commissioner, says in an autobiography intended for private circulation:

 

“Another important subject had to be handled firmly. I had belonged from the very first, 1843, to supporters of the principle, that it was our duty to Evangelize, and all leading Punjab officials were of the same school … After the Mutinies there were signs of fanatical spirit, and desire to introduce the Bible into schools, to push Christians forward in Government-office, to let the Missionaries interfere, to preach to the prisoners in Gaol.³

 

The Sikhs were the main target of the evangelists. It is noteworthy that in the 1855 census of Punjab, the British did not even acknowledge the existence of Sikhs--Sikhs were counted as Hindus! In order to accomplish their goal, the British took all necessary steps to destroy Sikh religious reform movements. As already pointed out, they sabotaged the peaceful Nirankari movement and ruthlessly suppressed the more assertive Namdhari movement. They were nonplussed and shaken that in spite of high recruitment of Sikhs in the army and payments to toadies (aristocrats and descendants of guru lineage, Bedis and Sodhis and clergy), the Namdhari movement spread rapidly among the Sikh populace throughout Punjab. The British were also very much concerned about the unity between Punjabi Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs. So to turn the attention of Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus away from the oppressive and exploitive colonial rule, they instigated intra as well as inter religious strife among Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. During the Sikh rule the relations between Sikhs and Muslims had improved so much that during the Anglo-Sikhs War, only Punjabi Muslims displayed total loyalty to the Khalsa Raj. The British agents who were implanted in the Namdhari movement attacked Muslim butchers to create hostility between Muslims and Sikhs. As already discussed, the split between the Namdharis and Sikh masses was accomplished by spreading the false propaganda against Baba Ram Singh and his followers alleging that he called himself as the reincarnation of Guru Gobind Singh.

 

The head of the British sponsored Ahmadiya Movement, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad caused uproar among Muslims by declaring himself as a Messiah (masih-i- maw’ud). In his Burahinh-i-Ahmadiya (1880-1884), which was meant to rejuvenate Islam on the basis of Quran, he tried to refute the Christian missionaries, the Arya Samajists and the Brahmos. In another work he argued that Guru Nanak was in fact a Muslim.⁴ To divide Punjabis on religious lines, Urdu was introduced as the medium of education in government schools up to matriculation level, though Punjabi was the dominant language of Punjab.⁵ The Muslim associations, Anjuman-i-Islamia and Anjuman-i-Himayat-i-Islam promoted Urdu as the language of Punjabi Muslims.⁶

 

In 1877, Brahmo Samaj, an organisation that was pro-British, anti-Punjabi, anti-Sikh and anti-Muslim, opened its centre in Lahore. It was an offshoot of Brahmo Samaj founded by Raja Ram Mohan Roy in Bengal and its main agenda was to promote the interest of upper caste Hindus and Bengalis in particular and the British imperialists. As discussed earlier, Raja Ram Mohan Roy extolled “the merits of the British Government in India” and extended wholehearted support to it without any hesitation. Raja Rammohan Roy and his compatriots hated the Muslims so much that they considered the British as “deliverers.” Their hatred towards the Muslim was so intense that in 1831 the Bengali Hindus refused to support a revolt against the British in Nadia and Barasat by textile workers (cotton weavers) as millions of them were thrown out of work by the British import of cheap textiles from England. Most of the workers were Muslims and their leader Titu Meer was also a Muslim. Hindus feared that the revolt, if successful, would bring back the Mughal rule.

 

The Brahmo Samaj leaders though, willing to make use of Urdu and Punjabi for propagating their ideas, favoured and promoted Hindi in Devanagri script as the language among its followers.⁷ There is no evidence that the Brahmo Samaj ever promoted Hindi in Devanagri script in Bengal, Assam, Orissa, Maharastara and Gujarat. The influence of Christianity on Brahmo Samaj ideology and its pluralistic creed made Punjabis wary of it.⁸ Their “more British than the British” attitude and unashamed support of the British cause earned them the disdain of Punjabis. “A Brahmo was looked upon as the most hateful person and … the mere public profession of the faith was enough to seriously lower a man in the eyes of his community,” recollects Ruchi Ram Sahni in his autobiography.⁹ The Brahmos manipulated an eccentric aristocrat, Dyal Singh Majithia to will his estate including his English newspaper, The Tribune, Dyal Singh College, and Dyal Singh Library to the Brahmo Samaj. When his widow Bhagwan Kaur and his closest relative challenged Dyal Singh Majithia’s will on the ground that Hindu inheritance laws could not apply to him as he was a Sikh, the Privy Council disagreed with them, thus ensuring that Hindu laws cover the Sikhs.¹⁰ This incidence leaves no doubt about who benefited the most from the British colonial rule and, whom it favoured the most! It also explodes the myth that the British promoted Sikh identity or they were friends of the Sikhs or they were concerned about the subversion of Sikhism by Hindus and Christian missionaries. Since it came under the control of Brahmo Samaj in 1898, The Tribune has served as the mouthpiece of anti-Punjabi and anti-Sikh propaganda.

 

In 1877, the British brought Swami Dayanand, a Gujarati Brahman, who did not find many listeners to his Vedic philosophy in his home state of Gujarat or in Maharastra and Bengal.¹¹ But the Punjabi Hindus rallied around him and formed Arya Samaj that also opened its centre in Lahore.  Moreover, the Swami who used to reject any doctrine, which did not accept the supremacy and divine revelation of Vedas was a changed man. He had deeply offended the Sanatan Hindus by his proclamation of Vedic sanction of eating bowine flesh, offering animals for religious sacrifices and using flesh in havan. Now he was advocating the protection of the sacred cow and he had established a “Cow Protection Society.” Besides, now the target of his venom was not Sanatan Hindus, but Muslims and Sikhs. Upon his arrival in Punjab he found that Punjabi Hindus knew neither Hindi nor Sanskrit and could read their scriptures only in Urdu translation.¹² His message of superiority of Vedas over other religious scriptures and the glory of ancient Aryans appealed and captivated the deeply wounded psyche of Punjabi Brahmans, Khatris, Aroras, and Banias; they accepted him as their “saviour.” But there was one problem.

 

Under more than seven centuries of oppressive Muslim rule, Brahmans, Khatris, Aroras and Banias were not only humiliated and dehumanised but also bastardised with little Aryan blood left in their veins. The blood that was flowing through their veins was mostly a blend of Afghan, Turkish, Arabic, Persian and Mughal. To solve this problem the Swami came with a clever idea. He asked them to forget their past, in other words to disown the language and culture of their ancestors. So the Arya Samajists denounced and renounced Punjabi language and adopted instead Hindi in Devangari script. From thereon the venom had set in Punjab, Punjabi culture, and Punjabi language. However, recently to hide their shame and to distinguish themselves from other Hindus, Arya Samajists like journalist Kuldip Nayar and ex-Prime Minister of India Inder Kumar Gujral have coined a counterfeit term “Punjabiat.” The way Punjabi Arya Samajists “manipulated” their own culture and language to come to terms with their past history is similar to what Hindu intelligentsia in general and historians in particular are doing to cope with their past history ¾ for them the Indian history starts on August 15, 1947.

 

For the Punjabi Arya Samajists who knew nothing about their scriptures, Swami was a paragon of virtue and great genius who carried all the wisdom of ancient Rishis and Munis in his head. However, soon Swami’s hot balloon of “ignorance and arrogance” was punctured when he held a debate with Giani Dit Singh on Vedas.¹³ The Swami (1877 C.E.) like the Pope more than 250 years earlier (1616 C.E.) kept insisting that the sun revolved around the earth.¹⁴ Giani Dit Singh in his Dambh Vidran (Exposing Hypocrisy), in Punjabi language, aptly remarked, “The Sadhu did not have the intelligence that many people credited him with. Sadhu Dayanand was a simple-minded and ordinary person, who wrote whatever came into his mind. He did not reflect whether it was proper or not.”¹⁵ For example, in his Satyarth Prakash, Swami has described Guru Nanak as a man of little learning. In Swami’s opinion Guru Nanak lacked knowledge of Vedas and Sanskrit.¹⁶ On the contrary, neither the Swami nor his followers knew that Guru Nanak rejected not only Vedas and all the essentials of Hinduism, but also Sanskrit and its script as a medium to propagate his philosophy. Guru Nanak recorded his thoughts in the language of people in Gurmukhi script, which he and Guru Angad constructed from contemporary crude scripts:

 

It is the teachings of Vedas, which has created the myths of sin and virtue, hell and heaven, and karma and transmigration. One reaps the reward in the next life for the deeds performed in this life¾goes to hell or heaven according to the deeds. The Vedas have also created the fallacy of inequality of caste and gender for the world.

AGGS, M 2, p. 1243.

 

Vedas are no different than the literature of other contemporary ancient people, for example, the Greeks. Vedas describe in great detail, religious beliefs, ceremonies, customs, daily human activities and sexual practices. But the vast majority of Hindus, who were even forbidden to hear the Vedas, not to speak of reading them, have been led to believe that Vedas are the source of “wisdom and spiritual and scientific knowledge.” Further, the deeply troubled and tormented Hindu psyche due to oppressive and dehumanising subjugation by Muslims and Christians for over a millennia needed some balm to heal. And that balm is the mythical “glorious Hindu civilization” based on Vedas before the Muslims conquest. Thus even for educated Hindus it is difficult to face the mind-boggling depravities recorded in Vedic literature. Moreover, little did the Swami realize that Vedas had been translated into English in the second half of the nineteenth century and, the “Arya zealots” were dependent on these translated materials!

 

It was only in the second half of the nineteenth century, when Max Muller initiated his series on the “Sacred Books of the East,” that a six-volume edition of Rig Veda (1840-74) was printed, and this ancient work became a book.¹⁷

 

Like Kama Sutra, it was the sexual content of the Vedas that caught the fancy of the readers: polygamy, polyandry, joint wife, sex with priests, sex with animals, sexual orgies, adultery, debauchery and Niyoga¹⁸ ¾ the custom of childless widow or woman having sexual intercourse with a man other than her husband to beget a child. It was this disclosure about the Vedas that upset the firebrand Arya Samajists so much that some of them started scurrilous propaganda against Islam and Sikhism. An anonymous author wrote Rangila Rasool (Pleasure Loving Prophet) to malign Prophet Mohammed. Raunak Ram and Bishumbar Dutt wrote a booklet, Khalsa Panth ki Hakikat, depicting Mata Ganga, Guru Arjan’s wife asking Baba Buddha for Niyoga.¹⁹ It was condemned by the Hindus including most Arya Samajists. It troubled Daulat Rai, an Arya Samajist, so much that he was forced to pick up the pen to author: “Sahib-i-Kamal” Guru Gobind Singh (Par Excellent Master, Guru Gobind Singh). In this book he reminded Punjabi Hindus of the humiliation and degradation to which their ancestors were subjected under Muslim rule before the Khalsa liberated them. Quoting various historical sources, he wrote:

 

Not only Muslim invaders killed Hindus by the thousands, looted their properties and carried away men and women as slaves in the thousands, but also under some Muslim rulers Hindus were not allowed even the comforts of life like -- good clothes, good food, ride horses, wear turbans or keep good homes or valuables or even beautiful children or wives. They were allowed to have minimum possessions for mere survival. Often they were given two alternatives: either conversion to Islam or pay Jazia (tax on non-Muslims).²⁰

 

However, blinded by hatred against the Sikhs, Jakobsh dug up this obscure booklet (Khalsa Panth ki Hakikat) to malign Guru Arjan and his wife. Even going beyond this, she steps in to distort Karewa, a ceremony for the marriage of a widow:

 

While Niyoga as delineated by Dayanand was similar in most respects to karewa widely practised by the Sikhs, the latter’s connection to landed property and its protection from the whims of widows as opposed to the desire of progeny, made karewa far more acceptable to the rulers.²¹

 

Contrary to her distortion, “Karewa” is remarriage of a widow according to customs and traditions²² practised by Jats and other agriculturist communities of Punjab long before the advent of Sikhism. Karewa is performed preferably between a widow and her diseased husband’s brother or cousin or any suitable match if brother or cousin is not available. On the other hand, “Niyoga” is the custom of childless married woman having sexual intercourse with another man to beget a child. Another outcome was sending a widow or any woman to a particular man for sexual intercourse so that she bears a son. This custom is discussed in detail in Vedic literature. In Aadi Parva of Mahabharata (chap. 95 and 103), it is mentioned that Satyawati had appointed her son to bestow sons to the queens of Vichitrvirya, the younger brother of Bhishma, as a result of which Dhratrashtra and Pandu were born. Pandu himself has asked his wife, Kunti, to have sexual intercourse with a Brahman to bless a son (Aadi Parva, chapters 120 to 123).¹⁸

 

The pretension of the British that they were the protector of “Sikh faith and identity” and perpetuation of this myth by Hindus and others like Jakobsh lies naked for any reasonable person to see:

 

To begin with, there was the very question of Sikh identity, and jurisdiction of the government to define who was a Sikh. This was complicated by government interference in religious affair of the Sikhs; the continued management of the Golden temple under official patronage; the glaring defiance of the Temple management in according differential treatment to low caste Sikhs causing obstruction to revivalist groups; the judgement in June 1919 confirming the appointment of an apostate Sikh as a manager of Gurdwara Babe di Ber, Sialkot, bringing to the fore the inadequacy of law; and British Courts serving as vehicles of imposition of status quo to the indignation of the Tat Khalsa.²³

 

 

References

 

1. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity.  New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 67.

2. Harjot Oberoi. The Construction of Religious Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 373.

3. Ibid., p. 219.

4. J. S. Grewal. The Sikh Of The Punjab. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 134.

5. Ibid., p. 130.

6. Ibid., p. 133.

7. Ibid., p. 132.

8. Harjot Oberoi. The Construction of Religious Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 232.

9. Ibid., pp. 232-233.

10. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity.  New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 189.

11. Ibid., pp. 94-95.

12. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, p. 143.

13. Joginder Singh. “Giani Dit Singh: Encounters with Swami Dayanand on Religious Issues.” Spokesman, September 2001, pp. 26-28.

14. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon  Books, 4th edition, 2001, p. 143.

15. The Spokesman Bureau. “Giani Dit Singh used his pen like a surgeon to remove the malignant growth on Panth’s body!” Spokesman, September 2001, pp. 24-25.

16. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, p. 145.

17. Harjot Oberoi. The Construction of Religious Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 7-8.

18. Soma Sablok. “Women and the Vedas.” http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Pantheon/4789/Articles/Women/  women_in_vedas.html

 19. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 247.

 20. Daulat Rai. “Sahib-i-Kamal” Guru Gobind Singh (Hindi). Amritsar: Gurmat Sahit Charitable Trust, 7th reprint, 1993, pp. 25-64.

21. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 248.

22. Kahan Singh Nabha. Mahan Kosh (Encyclopaedia of Sikhism). Delhi: National Book Shop, 1996, p. 307.

23. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, p. 159.

Previous Chapter | Table of Contents | Next Chapter

Copyright©2006 Baldev Singh. About the author

Print this Article                Email this Article                Comment on this Article