By D. S. Gill

It is the goal of a movement which fixes its direction, and “it is the existence of direction that makes revolution a political act and distinguishes it from a mere riot,” says Peter Calvert (A Study of Revolution, p 97).

From the very onset, Guru Nanak’s mission was revolutionary in character. Having made appraisal of the prevailing rot, he rightly decided to break completely with the aberrant Brahmanism system based on caste-division and exploitation.

Sikhism aims at nothing less than the abolition of a system of stratification and any entrenched stratification system might be amendable to marginal reform but would not surrender without a struggle when its very existence is at stake. That is why recourse to violence is essential rather than accidental to a revolution.

Guru Ajan’s decision to defend by accepting torture and martyrdom was a turning point in Sikh history, which laid down the foundation of Sikh militancy,

Wach says that extremists are prepared to shed blood if necessary to destroy the authority which interferes with the newly gained religious conviction, whether by threatening freedom of worship, or by insistence upon an official cult which monopolizes the religious scene, or by other demands (Sociology of Religion, pp. 297-98).

Calvinism made it a religious obligation to defend the faith against tyranny by use of force. The obligation to bring about a revolution in behalf of the faith was taught by the religions that engaged in wars of missionary enterprise, like the sects of Madhists and the Sikhs (Max Weber: Sociology of Religion, pp. 229-30).

Guru Hargobind raised the banner of armed revolt against the Mughal Empire when Jahnagir decided to stop the Sikh faith after torturing Guru Arjan to death.

And, after the martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur, it was Guru Gobind Singh, the last Guru, who. Created the Khalsa to oppose the State tyranny. Guru Gobind Singh had direct revelation from God in pursuance of which he created the Khalsa. In his own words:

“I assumed birth for the purpose of spreading the faith, saving the saints, and extirpating all tyrants…”

So, the revolutionary mission of Guru Gobind Singh followed was God’s own mandate (Macauliffe, Vol. 5 pp. 300-301).

The Gurus followed their experience and the Sikhs followed them. Even the struggle for political power was motivated and sustained by the faith that Guru Gobind Singh had blessed the Khalsa with sovereignty and hence it was bound to be fulfilled (Bhangu, pp. 11, 20, 131).

Thus, the Sikhs started a religio-political movement to achieve the goal of the Khalsa Panth as ordained by Guru Gobind Singh.

The Khalsa Panth rejected the pacifism of the caste society as well as its policy of monopolizing military power by the caste oligarchy. This fact is corroborated by W. Irvine: “Banda forces were recruited chiefly from the lower castes of Hindus and scavengers” (Later Mughals, pp. 94, 96, 98-99). According to Khafi Khan, many of the ill-disposed low-caste Hindus joined Sikhs and they were active in persecuting and killing Hindus of high castes.

Thus, the Khalsa became a worthy instrument for achieving the main two social objectives of the Sikh revolution, i.e. the creation of an egalitarian society and the capturing of political power for and by plebeian masses.

When the Khalsa tasted political power for the first time under Banda, “the lowest of low in Indian estimation” were appointed rulers. The common peasantry of the land suddenly attained political power. The leaders of the Missals were more de jure than de facto chiefs. Dr. Ganda Singh has expressed the view that the Khalsa abolished the zamindari system and established peasant proprietorship in land.

The Sikh movement had the very purpose and fixed direction to retain the sovereignty of the Panth. The mere fact that the Sikh movement succeeded in achieving its objectives as a result of a protracted armed struggle, is a strong proof that it did not swerve from its purpose or its direction. The Tat Khalsa did not hesitate to Part Company with Banda, its supreme leader at that crucial time in its history, when he showed an inclination towards deviating from the anti-caste and democratic principles of the Khalsa. The leaders of the Missals, though they were struggling for their survival, spumed Abdali’s several offers of negotiated settlement, and preferred that the Khalsa should capture political power in its own right (Bhangu p. 131, Cunningham, p. 79).

In fact, the Sikh militant movement, during it protracted armed struggle (from 1606 when Guru Hargobind for the first time unfurled the banner of revolt to 1764 when the Missals were established), had to face many ups and downs but never once swerved from its political aims. Thus, the Sikh revolution fully meets the purpose that the Khalsa was created for fighting, political tyranny and for capturing political power for the poor and masses.

A revolution has to have a set Purpose no less than that of abolishing or reconstructing the traditional systems of stratification, it is, therefore, obvious that the leaders of a revolution must be deeply conscious of their revolutionary mission and be devoted to it. “Doctrine must subdue spontaneity,” wrote Lenin.

In addition to ideological factor, revolution implies an orientation towards organization and institutionalization. And, it is the leaders who make crucial decisions and who coordinate the functioning of the organization.

It is also a reality that religion has not only been the mother of revolutionary values and goals, but it was the source of inspiration for many a radical movement.

Sikh Panth abolished not only the caste-system but an entire social system based on it. The Panth eliminated the Brahmins as a caste, or any other hereditary sacerdotal class, from their ranks. And the Sikhs completely broke away from the caste society, i.e the Hindu society.

The political and violent character of the Sikh revolution and its implications are obvious. Politically, it resulted in the overthrow of Mughal authority in Northern India and the establishment of the Sikh rule over an area roughly equal to that of France. More than that, in Hari Ram Gupta’s words, “We now close the narrative of the Sikhs, who placed themselves at the head of the nation, who showed themselves as interpreters of the rights of the people, who maintained the struggle between good and evil, between sovereign will of the people and the divine rights of kings, and the opposition of liberty to despotism, who avenged the insults, the outrages and slavery of many generations past; who liberated their mother country from the yoke of the foreign oppressor; who alone can boast of. Having created a bulwork of defense against foreign aggression, the tide of which had run its prosperous course for the preceding eight hundred years…” (History of Sikhs, p. 282).

The Gurus deliberately rejected the doctrine of Ahimsa (nonviolence) as a part of their revolutionary ideology and plan. The Khalsa was created for the very purpose of destroying the tyrant and for bringing about a mass political revolution (Sri Gur Sobha, p. 21; Koer Singh, pp. 1320, 137).

Violent means are an almost dispensable ingredient of revolution. But without being linked toa high ideological purpose, violence easily degenerates into oppression and tyranny.

It is not the ideology that imparts a sense of purpose and direction to a revolution, the role of leadership is no less important. So long as the Sikh Gurus were there, it is they who determined the goals of the movement and guided its direction and organization. Guru Gobind Singh devolved the leadership of the Khalsa on the five Beloved ones. Before passing away, the Guru conferred Guru ship on Guru Granth Sahib and leadership on the Khalsa Panth but made it subject to the ideology of the holy Granth. It was this collective leadership of the Khalsa Panth, which animated the Sikhs and sustained them in the severest trial they had to undergo during their revolutionary struggle for sixty years, the guerrilla warfare covered half the period.

The Sikh history is full of splendid examples of the devotion exemplified by Latif, who writes: “The pages of history shine with heroic deeds of this martial race, and the examples of devotion, patriotism and forbearance under the severest trials, displayed by the leaders of their community, are excelled by none in the annals of the nations.” (History of the Punjab, p. 629).

The Sikh movement had clear cut revolutionary aims; it was assiduously built by the Gurus over a long period through institutions such as Sangat, Pangat, Panj Piaras and Khalsa Panth. Not only the Sikh movement endured but it carried on a bitter, prolonged armed struggle till it emerged victorious.

Guru Hargobind was the first Guru to raise the banner of armed Sikh revolt and it was Guru Gobind Singh who created Khalsa to oppose the State tyranny.

The Khalsa is God’s army (Waheguruji Ka Khalsa), and carries out God’s mission (Waheguru ji ki fateh). This concludes, says Jagjit Singh our thesis that true religion is not only the mother of revolutionary values but has given birth to some revolutions. There is no doubt that religion has been distorted and misused for counterrevolutionary purposes. But, then, which other ideology has been immune to such distortions and misuse?

The task before the revolutionists, therefore, is two-fold to change the hierarchical stratification which is a great hurdle in ushering an era of true human equality and freedom. In this direction, the revolutionary movements of the twentieth century have made reasonably good progress. But, the second much more difficult task of changing man from within remains unsolved.

Article extracted from this publication >> November 18, 1988