Ruchi Ram Sahni (1863-1948), a professor of Chemistry in Lahore, describes his father’s morning rituals: “He had his daily role of idol worship with all the warmth of a sincere believer, so much so that when he was ill, he would ask me to go through the forms and formalities of washing the idols in the morning, properly dressing them, and making their usual offerings of flowers, sweets, and scents…I have every reason to conclude that my father was a sincere idol worshipper. The only thing that now raises doubts in my mind is the fact that both in the morning and at night he recited, with equal warmth and regularity, the Sikh scriptures Reheres and Sukhmani (emphasis in the original).”¹

Mehtab Singh, a prominent member of the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) in 1925, had to say this, “I, for one, say that if the Sikhs do not wish to remain in the fold of Hinduism, why should the Hindus seek to force them to do so. What benefit can they obtain by keeping an unwilling people as partners in their community? Why not let them go? That, Sir, is at the bottom of the whole excitement.”²

The first is an example of the Sanatan Sikh Tradition, a term used by Harjot Oberoi in his work ‘The Construction of Religious Boundaries’, while the second is the view of the Tat Khalsa which emerged in the last quarter of the 19th century. 

The word, Sikh came from the Sanskrit word śiṣya meaning disciple. The central text of Sikhs, Adi Granth doesn’t talk about any new ethics or metaphysics, according to Khushwant Singh, “…Sikhism accepted the Hindu code of conduct, its theory of the origin of the world, the purpose of life, the purpose of religion, samsara, the theory of birth-death-rebirth-these were taken in their entirety from Hinduism.”³ This point is dramatized in his joke, “Sikh scholars sat down to take Hinduism out of the Granth Sahib. They took it out page by page. In the end, however, they were left holding the binding cover in their hands.” 

Guru Nanak had his ceremony of yajñopavitam (sacred thread) performed.⁴ The first visible change occurred under the 3rd Guru, Guru Amar Das. Sanskrit ślokas in rituals of birth and death were replaced by the hymns of Gurus.⁵ Guru Amar Das also declared Udasi, a sect believed to be started by Sri Chand, son of Nanak, to be separate from Sikhs.⁶ However, the real turning point in Sikh history came when the 5th Guru, Guru Arjun Dev was killed by Jehangir on the suspicion of him assisting his son Khusrao’s rebellion. His son and the next Guru, Guru Hargobind militarized the Sikhs. He also looked down upon idol worship.⁷ 

Then in 1699, Guru Gobind Singh formed the Khalsa Panth. What was its motive? He declared with aplomb, “I wish you all to embrace one creed and follow one path, obliterating all differences of religion. Let the four Hindu castes, who have different rules laid down for them in the śāstras abandon them altogether and, adopting the way of cooperation, mix freely with one another…Let none pay heed to the Ganges and other places of pilgrimage which are considered holy in the Hindu religion, or adore the Hindu deities, such as Rama, Krishna, Brahma, and Durga, but all should believe in Guru Nanak and his successors.”⁸ 

The above address, as Khushwant Singh writes, “is based on the report of newswriter sent to the Mughal court and is vouched for by the Persian historian, Ghulam Mohiuddin.” Once initiated into Khalsa, it was a rebirth for the initiates. “Their words must be ‘Kritnash, Kulnash, Dharmnash, Karmnash,’ the forsaking of occupation and family, of belief and ceremonies.”⁹

Sainipati, the first biographer and contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh, in couplet 31 of the 5th chapter, “Bachan Pargas” of  ‘Sri Gur Sobha’, suggests that the Guru wanted every Sikh to turn Khalsa. But Sikhs were behaving the exact opposite. An Englishman in 1812 observed that many Hindus who turned to Khalsa saw it just as a ‘political association’.¹⁰  George Foster in 1798 stated, “…do not widely infringe on the customs and privileges of those Hindoos who have embraced the faith of the Siques. They still preserve the distinctions which originally marked their sects…They form matrimonial connections only in their own tribes, and adhere implicitly to the rules prescribed by the Hindoo law, in the choice and preparation of their food.”¹¹  Notably, after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh, it was a charismatic Hindu Rajput, Banda Bahadur who led the Sikhs. 

In 1801, when the threat of Abdali had ceased, and Ranjit Singh had subdued the warring misls, Punjab saw a Sikh monarchy. However, Ranjit Singh truly represented the Sanatan Sikh Tradition.  As Khushwant Singh notes, “The Sikhs triumphed and we had Ranjit Singh. You may feel that here at long last we had a Sikh monarch, and the Khalsa would come into their own. Nothing of the sort happened. ( ) Instead of taking Sikhism in its pristine form, he accepted Hinduism in its Brahminical form. He paid homage to Brahmins.”¹²

In 1849, when the British annexed Punjab, gradually, a new Sikh elite came up in Tat Khalsa. This elite waged a war against the Sanatan Sikh Tradition. Before going any further, let’s understand, based on the three-pointers: Guru, Granth, and Gurdwara,  the stark contrast between these two traditions.

For Tat Khalsa reformers, the Guru meant the 10 Gurus, only God, and his 10 messengers could be perceived as divine. Gurdwara meant “a Sikh place of public worship ‘established by or in memory of any of the Ten Sikh Gurus, or commemoration of any incident in the life of the Ten Sikh Gurus and is used for public worship by Sikhs or owing to some incident or tradition connected with one of the Ten Sikh Gurus, is used for public religious worship predominantly by  Sikhs.'”¹³ Whereas Granth was limited to Adi Granth only.

In Sanatan Sikh tradition, things were much more diverse. Along with reverence for Gurus, members of Guru lineages were also perceived as divine. Sodhis of Anandpur, the descendants of Guru Ram Das, were the virtual rulers of the place. During the 18^th and early 19^th centuries, no army campaign to the south of Sutlej was possible without their aid.¹⁴ Many of the major Gurdwaras were under their control, and they received large revenue-free land grants from Lahore state. Bedis, the descendants of Nanak, and those of other Gurus as well had their influence from Rawalpindi to Malwa. 

Along with members of the Guru lineages, popular saints like Sakhi Sarvar and Gugga Pir, whose origin can be traced back to the early medieval period, were also worshipped. Devotees from all over Punjab used to visit their shrines for pilgrimage. Another integral part of the Sanatan Sikh tradition was the worship of the goddess Sitala Devi. Other than this, they worshipped their pitrs (ancestors), jathera (clan ancestor), Bhoomia (Goddess who protected the land of the village), Suraj Devta (Sun), Dharti Mata (Earth), and many such deities.

Places of worship in Sanatan Tradition were not limited to Gurdwaras, but involved shrines built for Sakhi Sarvar, Gugga Pir, and sites built for the deities mentioned above. Harjot Oberoi tells “…in 1807 Maharaja Ranjit Singh and Raja Fateh Singh collectively undertook a pilgrimage to Jwalamukhi, in Kangra district, a shrine associated with a sister of Sitala Devi in popular mythology (Ram Sukh Rao, Sri Fateh Singh Pratap Prabhakar, p. 220). On arriving there they performed all the religious rites…Ranjit Singh…had its roof gilded in gold (Umdat, vol.3, p.243, and K.Erndl, ‘Victory to the Mother: The Goddess Cult of Northwest India’, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1987, p.130). In recognition of his munificence…temple officiants kept a copy of the Adi Granth in the shrine.”¹⁵

Holy scriptures for the Santan Sikh Tradition were not limited to the Adi Granth. Dasam Granth and Hindu scriptures were also included. It can be said that the Dasam Granth perfectly represents the Sanatan Sikh tradition. Many believe that it was written by Guru Gobind Singh himself. It has poetry like those of the nirguṇa medieval saint-poets. It also has a mythical narrative based on Mārkaṇḍeya and Devi-Bhagavata. It has stories of goddesses in the form of Devi, Chandi, and Durga waging battle against the demons. There are accounts of 24 Avatar of Lord Vishnu as well. As Harjot Oberoi notes, “As an anthology of such myths the Dasam Granth performed its symbolic role rather well. By juxtaposing the masculine with the feminine, the world-affirming devotional poetry with world-renouncing mythologies, eternal masters with transitory incarnations, monotheism with polytheism, and real-life drama with stories of absolute fantasy, our labyrinthine text was a wonderful vehicle to reconcile what we could call the Khalsa/ Sahajdhari paradox. The contradictory themes of the Dasam Granth were to become the everyday concerns of Sanatan Sikhs.”¹⁶

Another prominent part of the local religion was the Sepidari system, also known as the Jajmani system. What was this system? Harjot Oberoi notes, “Under the sepidari system, households from different caste groups entered into dyadic relationships to provide services to each other (Z.Eglar, A Punjabi Village in Pakistan, New York, 1960, pp.28-41 and T. Kessinger, Vilayatpur 1848-1968, Berkley, 1974, pp. 54-8). At the centre of such networks were propertied groups who controlled the main economic resource of the province: land. A household of artisans, servants or ritualists, called sepidars in local parlance, would enter into a contract with a propertied household and render services in return for a fixed percentage of the semi-annual harvest.”¹⁷ Harvest was one of the many modes of payment. 

These social groups provided both menial servics as well as ritualist services. Nais (barbers) were a prime example. “In his capacity as a menial, a Nai’s chief business was to shave and shampoo his clients’ hair, cut their nails…cook on festive occasions…As a ritualist, he conducted the preliminaries in matchmaking, accompanied the emissaries who concluded a betrothal, and transported messages from one village to another…During wedding ceremonies, his role was second only to that of a Brahman…The myths, legends, and other standard phrases uttered by a Nai during his ritual performances helped to reinforce and perpetuate the popular culture.”¹⁸

The community in Sanatan Sikh Tradition had a ‘fuzzy’ identity. As Sudipta Kaviraj writes,  “…construction of Individual or collective identity depended very heavily on a sense of context… Given different situations, a pre-modern person could have said that his community was either his religious or caste or occupational group, or his village or his region.”¹⁹ Khalsa tradition, on the other hand, had one Sikh identity for all contexts. The path for this change was led by a new elite that came up in Punjab after British annexation. 

When the British took over Punjab, they needed employees to run their bureaucracy.  But there was a heavy shortage of modern educational institutions in Punjab. The state machinery wasted no time, and many schools were set up. In 1860, a medical college was set up in Lahore, followed by the establishment of the Government College in 1864. The prime focus being Anglo-Vernacular education, Church and the state worked in complete union for this project. The British officials at Lahore helped found a Church Mission Association in 1852. 

Schools were used for two purposes, 1) imparting modern secular education, and 2) conversion of impressionable young minds.  As per the Report of the Punjab Missionary Conference held at Lahore in 1862-63, Donald McLeod, a prominent administrator of the Punjab administration had said, “If the Bible be the word of God and the books revered by the Hindus and the Mohammedan contain mere fables, then it must have been intended that the Christian rule prepare the way for the spread of the gospel.”²⁰ 

With this, there emerged a new Sikh elite, imbued with ideas of modernity, and with little or no regard for the Sanatan Traditions. “Have not our people relapsed into idolatry? Are they not seen worshipping hideous images of Hindu gods?… Are not our people seen worshipping Satis, Bhairon, Seetla [popular goddesses], Sakhi Sarvar, Guga Peer, and company. Are not our people sunk grossly in Mantras [incantations] and Jantras [horoscopes] and similar beliefs? Are not many of us worshipping the sun and moon, the earth and sky, the air, water, and fire? …Mantras and Jantras and amulets and a thousand other practices and beliefs of savages and which have so well and rightly been termed as the signs and practices of Kalyug or the dark ages by our esteemed ancestor Bhai Gurdasji… They listen to the stories of Krishna, see  Ras Lila and pictures representing acts of Krishna…,”²¹ (published in The Khalsa, 21 February 1900, p.7), opined a member of the new Sikh elite at that time.

This new elite was not the first of its kind. The Nirankari and Namdhari (also known as Kukas) movements too had risen in the 19th century. Both were against any kind of religious intermediaries and pilgrimages. They were also against the rituals followed by people during childbirth, marriage, and other such ceremonies. The Namdharis went a step ahead and started destroying the shrines of local deities, ancestral shrines, and other village sacred spots. But both of these groups couldn’t grow after a certain point as they couldn’t cope with the changes that the British had brought with them. “Devout Kukas exhibited their abhorrence for English Textiles by wearing garments made of Indian fabrics. They stayed aloof from the British judicial system, English schools, and sometimes even government jobs.”²²

Missionaries had started their work with full vigor post the annexation, and conversions all over Punjab were on the rise. In 1873, four Sikh students of a Christian mission school in Amritsar converted to Christianity. This prompted the foundation of Sri Guru Singh Sabha in Amritsar. This body had people who stood for Sanatan Sikh traditions and were mainly concerned with preserving old traditions.

It was a matter of time before the new elite came up with its own body. The impetus came from the spectacular success of a branch of Arya Samaj at Lahore in 1877. “…iconoclastic Hinduism and rational ethics”²³ was what Arya Samaj promoted, and it sat well with the emerging Sikh elite. But once the leaders of Arya Samaj started going after their Guru, and converting Sikhs to Hinduism, they left Arya Samaj. On 2 November 1879, Lahore Singh Sabha was formed. Initially, Lahore and Amritsar Singh Sabha tried to work together but their world views were completely incompatible, and as a result, they fell apart.

Both of these elites were now in a war to gain hegemony over the Sikh psyche. The Lahore Sabha formulated the concept of Tat Khalsa. “The word Tat denotes the unalloyed elements out of which the universe is created, and Khalsa in popular usage signifies ‘the pure’.”²⁴

Till now for the Sanatan Sikh elite, the goal was to preserve and propagate the rituals and traditions which were already being practiced. For Tat Khalsa, the goal was to purge Sikhism of what they thought was superstition and make it egalitarian and more rational. For both the elite, the study of Sikh scriptures was important, but not urgent. However, their attitude transformed drastically when, in 1877,  a German missionary Ernest Trumpp, hired by the British to translate the Adi Granth into English published his partial translation of the same. Interestingly, none of the Sikh elite was pleased by it.  

In his introduction to the translation, Trumpp writes, “They could easily destroy by their martial fury an old weak establishment, but were not able to erect a new solid fabric upon its ruins, as they had not in themselves the necessary moral and intellectual capacities”.²⁵ ‘The greater part of the Granth’ he wrote, ” contains a sort of devotional hymn, rather poor in conception, clumsy in style, and wearisome to read… The writings of the old Hindu Bhagats (or devotees) are on the whole far superior to those of the Sikh Gurus themselves as regards contents and style, especially those of Kabir from whom Nanak and his successors have borrowed all they know and preach. In fact so much is clearly seen from the Granth itself that the Sikh Gurus taught nothing new whatever, and if a separate religion and a partially new nationality has in the course of time sprung from it, this was not owing in any way to the doctrine taught by them, but to their financial and political organizations which they gave their disciples.”²⁶  This led to a great surge of interest in the Adi Granth, the history of different rituals, codifying history, and religious history. This search for ritual in the text played a significant role in the crystallization of a new Sikh identity as we will see later.

As discussed earlier, Dasam Granth, which was deemed at par with the Adi Granth at least till the first half of the 19th century, and can be regarded as the central text of Sanatan Sikh tradition was gradually lowered in stature by the Tat Khalsa.

One of the cardinal features of the local religion were saints like Sakhi Sarvar, Gugga Pir, village deity, practices like astrology, etc. Giani Ditt Singh, a foremost ideologue of Tat Khalsa, wrote against the worship of Pir Sakhi Sarvar among Sikhs. One of the themes of his criticism was that “undertaking a pilgrimage to the Pir’s shrine at Nagaha led to the intermixing of different religions and castes, resulting in the violation of social codes which proscribed such intermixture.”²⁷ Not just this, the preachers of Singh Sabha used to visit fairs associated with these pirs in the countryside and lambasted everyone assembled there. 

With regards to this, one such incident involving a Jat Sikh lady named Dani makes for a really interesting and dramatic read. As the legend goes, Dani, who was a devout worshipper of Sakhi Sarvar, was cured of her barrenness by the blessings of the Pir. In the 19^th century, when the teachings of the Tat Khalsa came into vogue, Dani’s descendants, after reading Ditt Singh’s criticism, themselves renounced their allegiance to Sakhi Sarvar.  

For Tat Khalsa, there was no place for any living Guru. In the Gadela controversy of 1885, this issue got contested. The Sanatan Sikh tradition argued, “The bond between master and disciples was viewed as sacrosanct and inviolable…Sanatan thinkers pointed out how the guru tradition had helped in the survival, spread, and propagation of Sikhism over the centuries.”²⁸ Tat Khalsa relented but refused to accord any recognition to those who preached Sanatan principles.

Apart from this, the Tat Khalsa focused their propaganda warfare on two points– control over the body, and life-cycle rituals. Control over the body primarily meant kesh (unshorn hair), kangha (comb), kachha (cotton underpant), kirpan (iron dagger), and kara (iron bracelet). Guru Gobind Singh had made this mandatory for every Khalsa Sikh. Others like Sahajdhari, Nirmala, and Udasi had different rules for their outward appearance.  

The Singh Sabha started building on Rahit Nama literature, whose one main theme was purging the Sikh identity of any and every non-Sikh practice. Singh Sabha went a step further, and made an argument that only those Sikhs who followed Rahat injunctions, especially one for outward appearance and initiatory rituals, were “true Sikhs”. As it was difficult to establish the same historically, the Tat Khalsa, to build their case, began writing histories of martyrs, and also historical fiction. “In popular biographies written in Gurmukhi and often distributed free of charge by a growing set of Sikh cultural associations, Sikh heroic figures from the eighteenth century were shown to have been punished, tortured, and killed for desiring to retain cultural markers”²⁹ (N.G. Barrier, The Sikhs and their Literature, Delhi, 1970, p.xxxviii). Bhai Vir Singh wrote novels on a similar theme. This literature had a deep impact on the average Sikh, and hence, they developed a  deep reverence for these external symbols. Such use of “martyr’s blood” to rouse public opinion would be used throughout Sikh history, as we will see later.

The caste, biradri, or sampradaya of a person dictated the life-cycle rituals. The Tat Khalsa elite started a sustained campaign to purge these rituals of any Hindu marker or sign. Barring the Rahit Nama literature, at least 24 manuals were published from 1884 to 1915 on life-cycle rituals. Brahmans and other cultural intermediaries like Nais were depicted as fraudsters and parasites. One of the many examples of change in rituals was the inception of the ‘Anand Marriage’ ceremony. The major difference was that in the Anand marriage ceremony, the couple would circumambulate the Adi Granth four times, and not the fire. Brahmans were not allowed to officiate the weddings, and no recital was to be done from the sastras and other Hindu texts. As a result of this sustained effort, the ‘Anand Marriage Act’ was legislated by the Imperial Legislative Council in 1909, thereby providing government recognition to Sikh separatism.

The Sanatan Tradition elite was constantly on the backfoot. Just like the Tat Khalsa, they too were using the newly emergent print culture and were sending their preachers to the countryside. But the Tat Khalsa had the support of forces of modernity, unleashed by the British. Let’s understand this with an example of the Sepidari system-

Tat Khalsa propaganda had started describing the groups who transmitted Sanatan Tradition, like Nais, and Mirasis, as tricksters, parasites, and cheats. However, the decisive blow came in the form of a new market economy. As Harjot Oberoi notes, “Customary social relationships were gradually replaced by market relationships…The social and moral obligations which were hallmarks of earlier arrangements had hardly any meaning in the changed context, where market forces increasingly dictated social equations. While wages were formerly paid in kind as a fixed percentage of the harvested crops, under the new monetary arrangements wages were commuted into cash and determined annually… revenue-free land grants that some of them had earlier enjoyed were resumed by the colonial state, which perceived them as non-productive. In fact some British administrators thought of introducing laws prohibiting the participation of Nais in ritual occasions such as weddings.”³⁰ 

The service of Nais as a messenger also got redundant, as, in the case of an emergency, a Nai was no match for the telegraph.  The old sepidari system, which functioned based on social relations and morality, started working on economic incentives instead. The role of groups like Nais as transmitters of culture, myth, and rituals was taken up by the newly emergent elite of the Tat Khalsa.

After 1857, the British were convinced of the loyalty of the Sikhs, and henceforth, they were recruited without any inhibitions. There was a strong sentiment among the British that the martial ferociousness of the Sikhs flowed out of their religious observances.³¹ Once in the army, it was a must for the Sikh recruits to undergo the initiation rite, and to maintain the external symbols. What happened when these soldiers traveled back home? Harjit Oberoi notes, “When Sikh soldiers from the British regiments proceeded on furlough or retirement to their hamlets, they brought home with them a distinctive image of what it meant to be a Sikh. Bravery, loyalty, scripturalism and membership in an exclusive religious community were among their most prominent characteristics. Since the image of Sikhism cultivated by the army blended so well with the image upheld by the Tat Khalsa, it is no wonder that Sikh soldiers became the staunchest supporters of the new episteme (Daljit Singh, Singh Sabha da Modhi, pp. 61-5 and Khalsa Akhbar, 23 February 1900, p.2).  Having attained a certain amount of social distinction and being seen by the rural society as men who were aware of the norms of the world outside the village, the views of these soldiers commanded considerable respect in the countryside. In an agrarian society, their lifestyle became a source of admiration and emulation.”³² Sikh soldiers acted as the backbone of the Tat Khalsa movement. A large number of subscribers of Sabha papers like Khalsa Akhbar came from the army. There were many instances when entire projects of Singh Sabha were funded by a regiment.

Notably, the most important aspect of Sikh religious life, Gurdwaras were still not under the control of Tat Khalsa. Since the 18th century, Gurudwaras had been managed by the Udasis. Khalsa Sikhs were on the run to avoid persecution from Mughals. Udasis being of impeccable conduct, and learned in scriptures, were a perfect choice for the job of granthi (scripture reader) and mahant (manager) of the Gurudwaras. Most importantly due to their appearance, they could disassociate with Sikhism when at risk. 

The Lahore Durbar granted large revenue-free estates to Gurdwaras. New land-settlement records under the British had registered Gurdwara property under the name of the Mahant of the Gurdwara. Canal projects started by the British dramatically increased the revenue generated from Gurdwara property, which now was Mahant’s private property. Excessive riches brought corruption in the behavior of some Mahants. Few even kept concubines and indulged in smoking and drinking as well. But the biggest sin of the Mahants was their usage of Hindu symbols and rituals in the Gurdwaras. Here’s a letter to Khalsa Akhbar in 1897, protesting the Hinduization of Sikh practices, “Near the Dukhbhanjani beri tree [in the Golden Temple precincts] there is a room on the front wall of which is painted a picture. The picture depicts a goddess and Guru Gobind Singh. The goddess stands on golden sandals and she has many hands – ten or, perhaps, twenty. One of the hands is stretched out and in this she holds a Khanda. Guru Gobind Singh stands barefoot in front of it, with his hands folded.”³³ 

All sorts of efforts were made from time to time to make these Mahants transfer the management of Gurdwaras to local Sikh bodies, but the legal route to do so was way too expensive for the reformers. Though the government maintained neutrality, they too were aware of the influence of Gurdwaras on public opinion. Thus, the control of the Golden Temple was in the hands of a manager who was responsible to the Deputy Commissioner of Amritsar.

Even when the Sikh society was witnessing such dynamic changes, Anglo-Sikh relations were quite amicable. The rate of Land assessment revenue was reduced, and several new varieties of crops introduced. Canal projects were undertaken.  As Sikhs were mainly agriculturists, these reforms increased their wealth and prestige. Adding to it, after Ranjit Singh’s death, there has been endemic lawlessness, but the British restored some semblance of law. The  traditional elites were stripped of many of their privileges. But by the time this elite started forming Singh Sabhas they came to the conclusion that without the patronage of the British they wouldn’t be able to do much.³⁴ As the Britishers also wanted to keep a check on these reformers, they too patronized them. “The 1891 census report noted ‘the marked preference shown for Sikhs in many branches of Government services.’ “³⁵

Though there occurred some strains in the Anglo-Sikh relations, such as in 1907 over a proposed amendment of the 1893 Punjab Colonization of Land Act,  over the Khalsa College management, and during the 1914 Budge Budge riots. However, it was during First World War that the entire Sikh community stood up to showcase their loyalty for the British. “War leagues, recruiting committees, publicity committees…were formed in virtually every district with the collaboration of influential local men…The Malwa Khalsa High School, Ludhiana, enlisted a sixth of its students…The management of the Golden Temple, the mahants of several gurdwaras…appealed for greater effort.”³⁶ By the end of the war, the number of Sikhs in the army had risen to a staggering 100,000.

As the World War ended, Anglo-Sikh relations started spiraling downwards. As for example, during the war period only, forcible recruitments to the British army by intimidation and blackmail had become a norm. In 1919, the price of food grains in some places increased by 100% as compared to the prices in 1917. In 1918, Influenza had claimed around 100,000 lives in Punjab. The final blow came with the passing of the draconian Rowlatt Bills, which was meted with widespread protests. In one of the peaceful protest gatherings at Jallianwallah Bagh in Amritsar, General Dyer opened fire on an unarmed crowd, in which 379 innocent people were killed and 2,000 others were severly wounded. Much to the horror of the Sikh community, the then manager of the Golden Temple, Arur Singh invited Dyer to the temple and presented him with a siropa (turban and kirpan). 

On the political front too, the Sikhs were having no success. The 1916 Congress-League pact had provision for separate communal representation for the Muslims, but nothing for the Sikhs. For Hindus, Sikhs were just part of the greater Hindu community.³⁷ Sikhs strongly resented, “Khalsa Akhbar in its issue of 9 November 1917 published a communication from Tara Singh warning his co-religionists that the Hindu and Muslim communities had organized a ‘conspiracy’ to ‘trample down smaller nations’… Sikhs should oppose any further constitutional reforms, since “They do not wish to replace the Anglo-Indian bureaucracy by a Hindu and Muslim bureaucracy.” “³⁸ Following this, the Sikhs also started demanding a separate electorate. “In November 1917 the Khalsa Advocate had written, “The reforms are demanded on the ground of India’s share in the war, and on account of that Sikhs, surely, deserve to receive the Lion’s share.” “³⁹ 

The Sikhs demanded one-third of seats in the provincial council to be reserved for them. The Government of India Act, 1919 accepted their demand for a separate electorate, but gave them only one-sixth of the seats. This arrangement was seen as treachery by Sikhs. With this, the Sikhs realized the need for a political organization to safeguard their interests, and thus, on 30 March 1919, the Sikh League was formed. 

Jallianwala massacre roused communal passions of the whole Sikh community. By the summer of 1920, several district Sikh Leagues had been set up. Released Ghadarites and demobilized Sikh soldiers of the First Word War swelled the day-to-day meetings. Symbols of Khalsa were becoming more and more visible. Soldiers in the army started wearing kirpans even at the risk of severe action. The stage was set for the return of Akalis. The Akalis were warrior ascetics who ascribed their origin to Gobind Singh. They strictly followed Khalsa precepts and had no tolerance for Hindu rituals. Under Phula Singh, they were among the most ferocious warriors of Ranjit Singh’s army. After the death of Phula Singh, they sunk into obscurity until now. 

Towards the end of 1912, while the capital was being shifted to Delhi, the Government had demolished an old boundary wall attached to the Rakab Ganj Gurdwara. The Tat Khalsa agitated, but then with the War, this issue got sidelined. In July 1920, the issue was raised once again, but the Government refused to back down. Local Sikh leagues reminded the Sikhs that Rakab Ganj Gurdwara marked the martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur. An appeal was thus made to constitute a Shahidi Dal, a band of martyrs who were willing to sacrifice their lives for rebuilding the demolished wall. As a Shahidi Dal of 80 was on its way to confront the Government in Delhi, the Government gave in and the wall was rebuilt. This was considered to be a huge win for the Tat Khalsa. But more importantly, it provided them with a template for the future protests. The intellectual elite of Tat Khalsa now had the support of fiery Akalis on the ground who were ready to take extra-legal steps if need be.

The same template worked in the Babe-De-Ber Gurdwara controversy in Sialkot in October 1920, and the Gurdwara was occupied.

In October 1920, public baptism of low caste men was conducted, and they were promised entry into the Golden Temple, but the temple administration didn’t allow it. Theological disputes followed, and finally, they were allowed entry. With this, the reformers occupied the Akal Takht, and within a few days, a provisional committee was formed to manage the shrine. 

The government, in an effort to take charge, announced a committee of 36 members to propose rules and regulations for the management of the Temple. As an immediate response, the Tat Khalsa, on 16 November 1920, constituted a counter body of 175 members. In December 1920, this body came to be known as the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). The SGPC instituted the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) to direct the activities of the Akalis. 

Following this, the Akalis had set their eyes on the Nankana Sahib Gurdwara in Lahore. Narain Das, the Mahant, was accused of shameless conduct, and misuse of temple funds. Revenue from Gurdwara was Rs 5,00,000 per year. There were rumors of an attack on the shrine. Narain Das petitioned the government for protection, he telegraphed to the Punjab Government, “Sikhs announced to seize Durbar Janam Asthan forcibly, leaders have gathered ten thousand men for the purpose, mercifully save, I am ready to bear the expenses of police guard, etc.; I will not hold myself responsible if any death occurred on the spot, at the time of fear the gate of Durbar Sahib will be closed, kindly send police guard immediately.”⁴⁰ Mahant’s pleas were considered unduly alarmist and were ignored. 

On 20 February, 1921 an Akali jatha made an unscheduled trip to the Gurdwara, mahant’s men opened fire, and over 150 people were killed.  In a matter of few days, thousands of Akalis had gathered around the Janam Asthan shrine, and the government was forced to hand over the shrine to Akalis. 

The government was now losing the perception battle, so it introduced the Sikh Gurdwara and Shrines Act of 1921. But the SGPC vehemently rejected it. Battle lines were now drawn in ‘Guru ka Bagh’ Gurdwara near Amritsar. Similar tactics were used, and the Akalis were able to take the Gurdwara under their control. The Tat Khalsa ideology was always popular in urban areas, but the Urban Sikhs were a minority. By 1922, Punjab Government noted, ”The Akali movement is gaining ground in the villages, and by an organized system of propaganda the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee has succeeded in persuading the ordinary Sikh zamindar that it is really representative of the Panth…the entire rural Sikh population is within measurable distance of turning against the Government…”⁴¹

On 9 July 1923, the government made the Maharaja of Nabha abdicate in favor of his son. In protest, the Sikhs of Nabha started Akhand Path (non-stop recitation of Granth Sahib).  One such Akhand Path was interrupted by the police, and the Akalis were arrested. The issue soon acquired religious fervor, and the jathebandi tactics were employed again. Next, a Shahidi jatha of 500 Akalis was dispatched. On 21 Feburary 1924, the jatha arrived at Jaito, and on its refusal to disperse, the police opened fire, killing 14 Akalis.⁴² As a result, the Sikh sympathy soured, and even partial Akali converts got involved in the agitation. As pressure on the government mounted, a new Gurdwara Bill was drafted, which satisfied all Akali demands. 

In the new draft, a person would or would not be deemed to be a Sikh depending on whether or not he makes a declaration stating: “I solemnly affirm that I am a Sikh, that I believe in the Guru Granth Sahib, that I believe in the Ten Gurus and that I have no other religion (my italics).”⁴³ Sahajdhari Sikhs, Udasis, Nanakshahis, and all such Sikh orders other than Khalsa Sikhs who considered themselves to be part of the larger Hindu community had to declare that they are not Hindus to participate in the management of Sikh religious institutions. The second important condition was that for the election of members in the Central board of management of Gurdwaras, a person should not be a patit (an apostate). Who was a patit and who was not, was to be decided by a judicial tribunal consisting of Khalsa Sikhs, and in the eyes of the Khalsa Sikhs, those who deviated from the rules of Khalsa were patits. On 7 May 1925, Tara Singh introduced the Sikh Gurdwara  Bill of 1925 in the Punjab legislative council, which was passed on 8 July 1925. The first resolution of the brand new ‘Central Board of Management of Sikh Shrines’ was to change its name officially to Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee.

The 1925 bill was an official recognition of the argument for a separate Sikh identity which Tat Khalsa had been making for the last four decades. The SGPC, by then, had established itself at the apex of the Sikh society. The Sanatan Sikh Tradition which once was the mainstay, was now completely sidelined. It was a matter of time before the demand for a separate homeland was made. This we will cover in the next essay.

To be continued…

References

1. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.2.
2. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, vol.2, 2004, p.213.
3. Dr. Koenraad Elst, Who is a Hindu, 2002, Chapter 8, 8.9.
4. Dr. Kirpal Singh, Janamsakhi Tradition, 2004, pp. 58-59.
5. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, vol.1, 2004, p.51.
6. J.D Cunningham, History of the Sikhs, 1853, pp. 44-45.
7. J.D Cunningham, History of the Sikhs, 1853, p.54.
8. Khushwant Singh, A History of the Sikhs, vol.1, 2004, p.82.
9. J.D Cunningham, History of the Sikhs, 1853, p.64.
10. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, pp.6-7.
11. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.7.
12. Dr. Koenraad Elst, Who is a Hindu, 2002, Chapter 8, 8.4.
13. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p. 186
14. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.111.
15. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, pp. 202-203.
16. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.99.
17. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.355.
18. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.354.
19. Sudipta Kaviraj, The Imaginary Institution of India, p.13.
20. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.219.
21. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, pp. 253-254.
22. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.200.
23. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.223.
24. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.305.
25. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, pp. 239-240
26. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.19.
27. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p. 308.
28. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p. 384.
29. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.330.
30. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, pp.357-358.
31. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.361.
32. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, 1994, p.362.
33. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, pp.22-23.
34. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.16.
35. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.25.
36. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.63.
37. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.74.
38. Ibid.
39. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, p.80.
40. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986,p.108.
41. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986, pp.136-137.
42. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986,p.180.
43. Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith, 1986,p.187.