Chapter 5

 

Maligning Jats

 

 

 

Unfortunately Jakobsh doesn’t know when to stop. Nor does she reflect for a moment on what she is writing! First, according to her, British colonists used the low status of Indian women as an excuse to assert their moral superiority over Indians: “Higher morality of the imperialists and superiority of Western ideology was sought to be effectively established by accentuating the low status of Indian women.”1 Later her Eurocentric mind uses this "imperialist argument" to malign the Sikh Jats. So much so that she pursues the question of female infanticide further by bringing the entire Jat community under purview of her discussion. Using as evidence an interpolated passage in the revised edition of Cunningham’s History of the Sikhs and the Kissa (poetic narration of love story) of Hir and Ranjha she declares Jats as “daughter killers,”2 while earlier she had described Jats as egalitarian people who practised gender equality:3

 

The ensuing association between Jats and female infanticide can be clearly seen in the famous Punjabi saga Hir and Ranjha. In its most illustrious version associated with bard Waris Shah (1978:44), the various methods utilized in the killing of infant daughters were spelled out. They included strangulation, poisoning, drowning and suffocation.2

 

Shah (quoted by Garret in Cunningham 1990: viii) goes on to lament the usurpation of prestige and power by this socially insignificant caste group:

     

Thieves have become the leaders of men.

Harlots have become mistresses of the household.

The company of devil has multiplied exceedingly.

The state of the noble is pitiable.

Men of menial birth flourish and the peasants are in great prosperity.

The Jats have become masters of our country.

Everywhere there is a new Government.4

 

Jakobsh uses the Kissa of Hir and Ranjha to malign the Sikh Jats. One wonders if Jakobsh knows that Waris Shah, the author of Kissa, was a Muslim just like the hero of the folktale, Ranjha and its heroine Hir. Besides, she is ignorant of the context in which Shah has described the homicidal methods: There is an argument back and forth between Hir and her parents about her love affair with Ranjha, the family’s cattle herder. They try to persuade Hir to forget about Ranjha and marry Saida, the son of a well-to-do landlord. But Hir refuses to budge from her love for Ranjha. Having failed to persuade her, her father takes out his frustration by telling his wife (on page 45 of author’s copy of Hir Waris Shah), “Why didn’t you kill this girl when she was born by strangulation or poisoning or drowning?” Now, such methods of killing are not specific for female infanticide; in fact any criminal can utilize these methods to commit murder. Moreover, Shah does not say anywhere in the Kissa that these methods were used by Jats to commit infanticide or kill women. Why would Jakobsh take on such a folktale to go after the Sikh Jats? 

 

There is another serious problem here: Jakobsh has concealed the reason why in 1915, Garrett inserted this passage under the name of Waris Shah in the revised edition of History of the Sikhs by J. D. Cunningham, which was first published in 1849. Cunningham had spent eight years (1838-1846) in close contact with Sikhs as an official of the East India Company, and he held high opinion of the Sikhs and their religion. Cunningham divulged in the first edition that the British were insincere in their dealings with the Sikhs and usurped the Sikh kingdom through treacherous means. This is how his younger brother Peter Cunningham described the treatment meted out to his brother by his superiors for telling the truth:

 

“The author fell victim to the truth related in this book. He wrote history in advance of his time, and suffered for it; but posterity will, I feel assured, do justice to his memory.”5

 

In the 1915 edition of History of the Sikhs, H.L.O. Garrett plucked out the passages that the British found objectionable and instead inserted another under the name of Waris Shah to depict Sikhs as depraved people, thereby justifying British actions against the Sikhs:

 

The author gives a somewhat turgid description of battles of war¾indeed, the language in the account of the battle of Sobraon reminds one of the story of the battle in poems of Mr. Robert Montgomery¾and he concludes his narrative by some general remarks upon English policy in India. From the latter I have removed some passages which are not only injudicious but which have been stultified by the march of events.6

 

Here are some other facts to consider about the passage under Shah’s name inserted by Garrett in the 1915 edition of Cunningham’s History Of The Sikhs:

 

1. I have in my possession Hir Waris Shah in Gurmukhi script with 335 pages published in the 1950s by Bhai Jawahar Singh Kirpal Singh and Co. Upon comparing the questionable paragraph in Hir Waris Shah (p.332) with the passage inserted by Garrett in the revised edition of Cunningham’s History of the Sikhs, I find major differences between the two. For example: There is no mention of “Peasants are in great prosperity. The Jats have become masters of our country. Everywhere there is a new Government.” Moreover, in the entire passage there is no mention of the word “Jat.”

 

2. Most probably, Waris Shah (1730 or 1738-1790?) talks of the lawlessness and anarchy that had taken hold over Punjab, not about Sikhs. In 1739, Nadir Shah’s conquest of the province of Lahore shattered government administrative machinery and ravaged the countryside bringing destruction, desolation and disorder all around.7 This was followed by seven invasions of Ahmad Shah Abdali from 1748 to 1769, which played havoc on the countryside and rendered the Mughal government ineffective.8 On the top of this were lightening attacks by the Sikhs on government headquarters all over Punjab.

 

3. It is well known that there have been deletions as well as interpolations in Punjabi kissas including Hir Waris Shah. Moreover, here we are dealing with people (colonists) who had justified slavery, colonization, and genocide of native populations on the pretext of saving the “soul of heathens” and “civilizing the savages,” thus turning the meaning of civilized “upside down.”  In all likelihood these lines about Jats were interpolated in Hir Waris Shah at the behest of the British to malign the Sikhs. It is also intriguing that Shah Mohammed (1780-1862) who wrote Anglo-Sikh War (Angraijan Te Singhan Di Larai) in 1847 soon after the 1845-46 Anglo-Sikh War, did not blame the British or make mention of the treachery of Lal Singh, Tej Singh and Gulab Singh. Instead, he lays the entire blame for the war on Rani Jindan.9 The British had also implanted other stories (sakhis) in hagiographic literature which stated that Guru Teg Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh had prophesied the British conquest of India:

 

One day, as Guru Teg Bahadur was in the top story of his prison, the Emperor Aurangzeb thought he saw him looking towards the south in the direction of Imperial zenana. He was sent for the next day, and charged with grave breach of Oriental etiquette and propriety. The Guru replied, ‘Emperor Aurangzeb, I was on the top story of my prison, but I was not looking at thy private apartments or any queens. I was looking in the direction of the Europeans who are coming from beyond the sea to tear down thy pardas and destroy thine empire.’ Sikh writers state that these words became the battle-cry of the Sikhs in the assault on the mutineers in Dihli (Delhi) in 1857, under General John Nicholson, and thus the prophesy of the ninth Guru was gloriously fulfilled.

 

When it was represented to Guru Gobind Singh that a Muhammadan army would eventually come to overpower his Sikhs, he replied, ‘What God willeth shall take place. When the army of the Muhammadans cometh, my Sikhs shall strike steel on steel. The Khalsa shall then awake, and know the play of battle. Amid the clash of arms the Khalsa shall be partners in present and future bliss, tranquillity, meditation, and divine knowledge. Then shall the English come, and, joined by the Khalsa, rule as well in the East as in the West. The holy Baba Nanak will bestow wealth on them. The English shall possess great power and by force of arms take possession of many principalities. The combined armies of the English and the Sikhs shall be very powerful, as long as they rule with united councils. The empire of the British shall vastly increase, and they shall in every way obtain prosperity. Wherever they take their armies they shall conquer and bestow thrones on their vassals. Then in every house shall be wealth, in every house religion, in every house learning, and in every house happiness.’10

 

4. When Shah wrote his work in 1768 C.E. (Hijri 1180), the population of Sikhs was minuscule in comparison to the population of Muslims and Hindus. Even after the Sikhs had ruled Punjab for roughly 90 years, in the 1868 Punjab census conducted by the British, the Sikh population constituted only 6.5%.11 Therefore one must ask: If Sikhs were so bad, as portrayed in the passage attributed to Shah by Garrett, how then could such a small community defeat three formidable foes--the Afghan invaders, the Mughal government and the “defenders of the caste system?”

5. Besides, if Shah did write this passage against Sikhs then it isn’t difficult to understand why he was so upset over the defeat of the Mughal government! Indian Muslims have two main social divisions: Ashraf, or noble that includes descendants of foreign born Muslims and converts from higher Hindu castes and, Ajlaf, or common people, converts from lower Hindu castes.12 Shah was a Syed Muslim who had nothing but contempt for women and lower castes, particularly Jats. In his Kissa, he never misses the opportunity to downgrade Jats by putting down Ranjha who was a Jat. Shah used stereotypes to malign Jats, women, and the people of lower castes. Probably he was a descendant of a Brahman or a Khatri who had converted to Islam. Brahmans and Khatris who converted to Islam were accommodated among Ashraf Muslims through titles like Syed or Khan. There is a clue in his writing about his possible Hindu ancestry:

 

The son of a sweeper (chuhra) cannot become a Syed like the son of a sheep cannot become a horse. O Waris Shah, the sons of barbers, shoemakers and millers never become fakirs (hermits). 

Waris Shah, Hir Waris Shah, p. 36.

 

Waris Shah, people would laugh if a chuhra (sweeper) wrestles with a Khatri (Kshatriya).

            Waris Shah, Hir Waris Shah, p. 239.

 

A cursory reading of Hir Waris Shah reveals that it is replete with derogatory remarks and stereotypes against women (pp. 31, 239, 258-259), lower castes (pp. 181, 239) and Jats (pp. 107, 185, 197, 316). In the entire work, Shah mentions Sikhs only twice, once in a derogatory manner and, the other indirectly when he grieves over the conquest of Kasur by Sikhs. While describing various gurus, he says kesadharis (who keep unshorn hair on head) have ten Gurus.

 

Kesadharis have ten Gurus, as Kado (Hir’s uncle) is the guru of impostors who disguise themselves in unusual modes of clothing.

            Waris Shah, Hir Waris Shah, p. 187.

 

6. In the first half of the eighteenth century, we see the Mughal authorities and their collaborators¾the “defenders of the caste system” unleash a reign of systematic murder of the Sikhs. There were frequent bloody battles between the Sikhs and their opponents resulting in two major massacres of the Sikhs better known as the big and small ghalugharas (holocausts), and Nadir Shah and Ahmad Shah Abdali’s hideous and devastating invasions of India. Given all this bloodshed, Shah is silent about it. However, he grieves over the conquest of the city of Kasur, the birthplace of his murshid (spiritual guide) by the Sikhs.

 

Out of the whole of Punjab, the land of waters, I am very sorry about Kasur.

Waris Shah, Hir Waris Shah, p. 332.

Notwithstanding what Waris Shah said in the passage (p.332), which may or may not be about Sikhs, other Muslim writers paid tribute to the “Sikh character.” In contrast to Waris Shah, Bulleh Shah (1680-1758 C.E.)13 deeply felt the pain of the carnage in Punjab. He condemned the bigotry of Muslims, tyranny of the caste system and atrocities of the Mughal rulers. He applauded the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur by calling him gazi (p. 9). He echoed Guru Gobind Singh’s proclamation that his one Sikh will fight a legion and his sparrow will tear apart the hawk:

 

The rabbits ate the hawks and the sparrows tore apart the goshawks. The ones clad in course blankets became the rulers and the rulers became beggars.

Bulleh Shah, p. 9.

 

I am not talking about the past or future, I am talking about the present. Had there been no Guru Gobind singh, everyone would have been circumcised.

Bulleh Shah, p. pp. 9-10.

 

The Mughals got intoxicated with poison (political power and immorality). The ones clad in coarse blankets became rajas. All the Ashrafs (noble Muslim) are now silent. Why did not they protest what the Mughal rulers were doing?

Bulleh Shah, p. 12.

 

I grew up hearing the following couplet attributed to Bulleh Shah. When a price was fixed on the head of a Sikh in the early eighteenth century, Sikhs took shelters in jungles and in the desert of Rajasthan. After his meeting with Sikhs in the jungle, Bulleh Shah wrote:

 

They fight battles, sing praises of God and have free Langar (community kitchen). Bullah is pleased with them and so is God.

 

When Nadir Shah’s army looted Punjab from Peshawar to Ravi, pillaging village after village, Bulleh Shah recoiled with pain:

 

The door of hell is open to let out loud weeping and wailing. Punjab has been ruined utterly.

Bulleh Shah, p. 13.

 

Similarly, Qazi Nur Mohammed who witnessed the battle between Ahmad Shah Abdali and the Sikhs in 1764 C.E. observed that Sikhs were the “beau ideal of a human being and were popular among the people of Punjab.” It is noteworthy that he mentioned “people of Punjab,” not Hindus or Muslims. Further on he made telling remarks about the character of Sikhs in his testimony:

 

a.       Sikhism is distinct from Hinduism.

 

b.      The Sikhs never kill a coward and do not obstruct one who flees from the field. They seldom resort to cold-blooded murder even of their enemies.

 

c.       They respect the chastity of woman as part of their faith and honour, and adultery does not exist among them. They do not rob a woman of her gold and ornaments, may she be a queen or a slave girl. 

 

d.      They never resort to stealing and no thief exists among them and they do not keep company with an adulterer or a thief.

 

e.         When in festivities, they surpass Hatim in generosity.14

 

Additionally, Professor Mohammed Iqbal, the twentieth century renowned poet and Islamic scholar attributed the victory of Khalsa forces (Sikhs) over Muslim rulers to the Sikh character and spirit:

  Khalsa shamsheero Quran ra burd,

  Andrin Kishwar Mussakmani namurd.15

 

The Khalsa took away the sword and Quran from the Muslims and shattered the dreams of Muslim conquest.

 

In other words, it was their faith, the very Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat) that inspired the Sikhs to fight with dogged determination.

 

7. It was the plundering of India by Nadir Shah of Persia and repeated invasions by Ahamd Shah Abdali of Afghanstan that increased the prestige and popularity of Sikhs among the people of Punjab. After defeating the Mughals at Karnal, Nadir Shah ravaged Delhi and collected a huge booty, including the bejeweled Peacock Throne, the famous Koh-i-Noor diamond (the mountain of light) and thousands of men and women as slaves. For his return journey in 1739, he chose to travel via the foot of Himalayas to avoid the scorching heat in the plains. That suited the Khalsa very well, who deprived him of a part of the haul including Indian artisans and women. The Khalsa started harassing Nadir Shah’s booty-laden forces right from their entry into Punjab down to Indus. They deprived him of a large part of plunder including men and women, without facing Nadir Shah’s army in an open combat. When apprised of the character of the Khalsa whose “houses were their saddles,” Nadir Shah perceptibly told Zakaria Khan, “The day is not distant when these rebels will take possession of the country.” The exploits of the Khalsa against Nadir Shah endeared them to the people and greatly added to their prestige and influence, especially when they restored to Hindus and Muslims their womenfolk taken by Nadir Shah’s forces as spoils of war.16

 

Repeated invasions of Ahmad Shah Abdali created unparalleled chaos and anarchy, a high degree of economic and public insecurity and personal tragedy for the population, irrespective of caste, creed or religion. An adage coined during that period is still remembered in Punjab:

 

khada pita lahe da, rehnda Ahmad Shahe da.

Whatever one can eat or drink is profitable; the rest belongs to Ahmad Shah.17

 

In the face of such horrible conditions the Khalsa rose to challenge the invaders and rescue men and women from their clutches, which rightly won the hearts of the people and gave birth to a popular lore:

 

chaie ke run gaee Basre nun, ke mori baba dang walia Sardara.

O dear Sardar brother with a daang (strong wooden club), please bring back my woman from Basra¾ alluding to the abduction and sale of Indian women at Basra market, and appealing to the Sikh armed brother to retrieve them.18

 

8. This chapter will be incomplete if I fail to highlight the contradictory statements Jakobsh wrote about the Jats. Read it for yourself: 

 

The earliest sources depicting the pastoral Jats made specific mention of a disposition of equality between men and women. The traveller Hiuen Tsang noted in the seventh century:

 

By the side of river Sindh, along the flat marshy lowlands for some thousand li, there are several hundreds of thousands (a very great many) families settled. … They give themselves to tending cattle and from this drive their livelihood. … They have no masters, and whether men or women, have neither rich nor poor [italics mine].3

 

Then later on in the same chapter she says that Jats are “daughter killers:”

 

The ensuing association between Jats and female infanticide can be clearly seen in the famous Punjabi saga of Hir Ranjha. In its most illustrious version associated with bard Waris Shah (1978:44), the various methods utilised in the killing of infant daughters were spelled out. They included strangulation, poisoning, drowning and suffocation.2

 

How is it possible that egalitarian Jats who believed in the equality of men and women also practiced female infanticide on a large scale as claimed by Jakobsh? Is it a fabrication of her scheming mind? 

 

Similarly, as discussed earlier, she says that the Sikh Gurus did not do any thing to ameliorate the problems of women, or they were ambivalent about their situation, or they were biased against them or critical of them:

 

“Significantly, the fourth Guru was highly critical of women in his writings.”19

 

A few paragraphs before the above remark about the fourth Guru, Jakobsh argues:

 

Given the egalitarian nature of the Jats in the early Indo-Islamic period, it is possible that it was the women in particular who were attracted to the message of emancipation of the Sikh gurus and, consequently, to full participation in the developing Sikh Community. A number of factors point to this development.

One, the message of the Sikh gurus with regard to salvation was accessible to both women and men; two, there are strains within sources (though typically barely audible) which point to women as having been active participants in the developing community; three, Guru Amar Das’ criticism of society with regard to the situation of women; four, the plausibility of missionary activities by women also during the time of Guru Amar Das, resulting most certainly in active outreach towards women; and five; scriptural indications of an influx of women into the Sikh panth during the time of fourth guru.20

 

I wonder whether Professor Jakobsh habitually writes with imbedded contradictions! Her mentors at the UBC failed to correct her. Is it a case of mentors showing ignorance of the subject matter? One may ask why the egalitarian Jats, especially their women folk would join the Sikh movement, which according to Jakobsh discriminated against them and, especially at the time of fourth Guru who she believes was highly critical of women?

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

1. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 103.

2. Ibid., pp. 40-41.

3. Ibid., pp. 32-33.

4. J. D. Cunningham. History Of The Sikhs. New Delhi: D. K. Publishers Distributors (P) Ltd., reprint, 1996, pp. vii-viii.

5. Ibid., pp. xviii-xix.

6. Ibid., p. ix.

7. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, pp. 99-103.

8. Ibid., p. 103.

9. Ganda Singh. Punjab Dian Varan (Punjabi). Amritsar, 1946, pp. 170-174.

10. Max A. Macauliffe. The Sikh Religion Vols. I & II. New Delhi: Low Price Publications, reprint, 1993, Vol. I, pp. xviii-xix.

11. Harjot Oberoi. The Construction of Religious Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 210.

12. Jagjit Singh. The Sikh Revolution: A Perspective View. New Delhi: Bahri Publications, 4th reprint, 1998, pp. 50-51.

13. Jit S. Sital. Bulleh Shah: Jiwan Te Rachna (Punjabi). Patiala: Punjabi University, third reprint, 1988.

14. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, pp. 106-07.

15. Harinder Singh Mehboob. Sehje Rachio Khalsa (Punjabi). Amritsar: Singh Bothers, 2000, p. 1113. A Review of Guru Hargobindji, His Life and Times by Hardit Singh: Abstracts of Sikh Studies, 1996, October-December, pp. 76-79.

16. Sangat Singh. The Sikhs In History. New Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001, pp. 99-100.

17. Ibid., p. 106.

18. Ibid., p. 106.

19. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating Gender In Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 103.

20. Ibid., pp. 33-34.


Previous Chapter | Table of Contents | Next Chapter



Copyright©2006 Baldev Singh. About the author


Print this Article                Email this Article                Comment on this Article