Guru Tegh Bahadur's Martyrdom

RECENTLY, A section among the Sikhs has been led to believe that the account in the NCERT's textbook, MedievalIndia, meant for class XI has cast serious aspersions on the patriotism of Guru Tegh Bahadur and haspresented facts in a distorted manner. Fuel has been added to the fire by the press statement (September 29)of the NCERT Director, Dr. J. S. Rajput, who not only talks of some "adverse and derogatory'' remarks in thebook about Guru Tegh Bahadur, but goes on to say "this is what was being passed off as history by some self-styled secularists''. He even accuses such historians of working hand-in- glove with destablising forces. Ifsome historians, or for that matter, any individual acts in collusion with destablising forces, the Union HomeMinister has all the power and authority to act against them. It is hardly upto the NCERT Director to makesuch allegations, thereby creating unnecessary tension, and importing politics into what was an historicaldebate.

For the historians, difficulties have been created because the execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur in Delhi in1675 is not mentioned in any of the contemporary Persian sources. Nor are there any Sikh contemporaryaccounts, those written towards the end of the 18th century depending on "the testimony of trustworthySikhs''. They are, therefore, often conflicting. The earliest account of the events leading to the Guru'sexecution is in Siyar-ul- Mutakharm by Ghulam Husain Taba- Tabai in 1780, more than 100 years afterwards.Ghulam Husain states that "Tegh Bahadur, the eighth successor of (Guru) Nanak became a man of authority with alarge number of followers. (In fact) several thousand persons used to accompany him as he moved from place toplace. His contemporary Hafiz Adam, a faqir belonging to the group of Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi's followers, hadalso come to have a large number of murids and followers. Both these men (Guru Tegh Bahadur and Hafiz Adam)used to move about in the Punjab, adopting a habit of coercion and extortion. Tegh Bahadur used to collectmoney from Hindus and Hafiz Adam from Muslims. The royal waqia navis (news reporter-cum- intelligence agent)wrote to the Emperor Alamgir... of (their) manner of activity, added that if their authority increased theycould become even refractory''.

In the book I have called this the "official account'' or the official justification because for anhistorian, official accounts are generally full of evasion and distortion to justify official action. As itwas, Hafiz Adam had died much earlier. Also these events have been placed at Lahore. But there is no reason toreject the Sikh tradition that the Guru was imprisoned and executed at Delhi.

Ghulam Husain's account of "disturbances'' created by Guru Tegh Bahadur in the Punjab is supported by SohanLal in his Umdat ut Tawarikh one of the most respected histories of the Sikhs, coming up to the time of RanjitSingh. After reciting the manner of Guru Tegh Bahadur's accession to the gaddi, he says: "With the passage oftime, thousands of soldiers and horsemen used to be with him and camels and goods of all kinds remained at hisdisposal. Further more, those who were refractory towards the amirs, the zamindars, the ijaraddars, the diwansand the officials in general used to take refuge with Guru Tegh Bahadur. Regardless of the numbers presentwith the Guru, they were all fed by him. Pain inevitably follows comfort. Some degraded persons reported toEmperor Alamgir that Guru Tegh Bahadur was staying in the country (Doab) of Malwa (in Punjab) with thousandsof soldiers and horsemen, whosoever was refractory towards the officials took refuge with him. They warned theEmperor that if no notice of the Guru was taken it would be an incitement to insurrection; and that if he wasallowed to continue his activities for a long time, it would be extremely difficult to deal with him(later).''

On this basis, I concluded and wrote in the NCERT textbook as follows: "Sikhism had spread to many Jat(agriculturists) and artisans, including some from the law castes who were attracted by its simple,egalitarian approach and the prestige of the Guru. Thus, the Guru, while being a religious leader, had alsobegun to be a rallying point for all those fighting against injustice and oppression''. Thus the Guru isabsolved of the charge of coercion and extortion, and portrayed as a defender of the people. In the process,there must have been clashes with local officials which they denounced as marks of insurrection. These isanother passage in the NCERT text book regarding the Guru's execution to which objection has been taken. Itreads as follows: "According to Sikh tradition, the execution was due to the intrigues of some members of thefamily who disputed his succession and by others who had joined them.''

In this context, it is very well known that right from the death of Guru Nanak there were disputesregarding succession which sometimes led to splits, such as the Udasis and to mutual wranglings, sometimeseven leading to violence. Thus, the succession of Guru Tegh Bahadur to the gaddi was disputed by Ram Das,elder son of Guru Har Rai, and by many Sodhis.

We are told that this led Guru Tegh Bahadur moving to Delhi. But here he came face to face with thehostility of Ram Rai, elder brother of Guru Har Kishan, who had been at the Mughal court shortly afterAurangzeb's accession to the throne, and had his own claim to the gaddi. Ghulam Muhiuddin Bute Shah in hisTarikh- i-Punjab, says that the Guru went on a pilgrimage, and then founded Makhowal. He was summoned to Delhiat the instance of Ram Rai. "Ram Rai represented to the Emperor that Guru Tegh Bahadur was very proud of hisspiritual greatness and that he would not realise his fault unless he was punished. Ram Rai also suggestedthat Guru Tegh Bahadur be asked to appear before the Emperor to work a miracle, if he failed, he could be putto death.''

Further details of the story dealing with the Guru's execution hardly concern us. In some other accounts,Ram Rai is not implicated in the attempt to get the Guru murdered. They charge some elements at the court andsome amirs who kept demanding that the Guru perform a miracle to prove his spiritual powers. This also appearsdoubtful because Aurangzeb did not believe in mysticism or miracles.

Regarding the religious aspect which is important but needs a fuller discussion, it has been held in thebook that the Guru was also giving expression to the discontent and disaffection of the Hindus of the regionfor Aurangzeb's breaking even some temples of long standing. The book concludes by saying that "Aurangzeb'saction was unjustified from any point of view and betrayed a narrow approach,'' and that "the Guru gave up hislife in defence of cherished principles''.

Thus, there seems no occasion for creating and nursing the feeling that in the textbook the Guru has beenmaligned or that an attempt made to hurt Sikh sentiments. On the other hand, the book places Guru Tegh Bahaduron a very high pedestal. Despite this, if the NCERT Director has a different agenda of replacing the presentsecular-oriented history textbooks by a different set of books reflecting the current Hindutva ideology thatis a completely different matter.

(The writer was Professor of History, JNU, New Delhi and former UGC Chairman. This article first appearedin The Hindu, and is reproduced here courtesy, The Delhi Historians Group)