Introduction:

The concept of Meeri-Peeri in the Sikh[i]Panth[ii] is, to an extent, a defining element of their socio-politico-cultural actions and conduct within their own social sphere and also defines their interactions with ‘others.’ From a historical perspective, it can be safely assumed that it is a Semitic[iii] concept where the dissolution and confluence of socio-political and spiritual power in a person or institution can sometimes control every sphere of life. There is a need to explore these foreign concepts from a Bharata centric viewpoint as such imports have their own peculiar implications when groups or communities guided by such frameworks interact with society guided by Bharata centric values in the short and long run.
‘The semantics[iv] and etymology[v] of the word ‘Meeri’ show that it comes from the Persian word ‘Meeri’ which is a derivation from the Arabic word ‘Amir[vi]’ which is pronounced as ‘a-MEER‘ meaning political or military leader, commander or appointed governor, lord, chieftain of some clan or tribe, etc. This word signifies and demonstrates the temporal power or worldly authority acquired through military power. Meeri signifies political power which can control the worldly, materialist conduct of others. In Arabic-Persian traditional socio-political milieu, Amir or Meer is connected to the power enjoyed by kings and rulers where the force of the military results in the ability and authority to rule or influence the society in general and individuals in particular. Similarly, Peeri in its semantics and etymology also has the same Persian roots i.e., ‘Peer[vii]’ which means Head of spiritual/religious order or sect, saint, spiritual guide, sometimes a senior man of clan or tribe, generally it stands for non-worldly, religious authority. A noticeable commonality between Meer and Peer is that they both wield the power which influences and controls their followers. In Sikh Panth, the words Meeri and Peeri when used jointly and collectively establish a system of managing, regulating, and controlling community in-rem. This is not a new phenomenon: we find such a culmination of political and religious power in one person in Christianity as well – in the form of the Papal Monarchy[viii]. In Christianity, the concept of ‘two swords‘[ix] was enunciated by Pope Gelasius[x] during the 5th century. According to this doctrine, the church and state were equal in status. During the crusade period, middle ages, the Pope achieved extraordinary power and wealth in comparison to all the kings and feudal lords combined. His subordinate officials, such as archbishops, bishops, and abbots became as powerful as feudal lords, in wealth and in military strength. The reason for this power of the church was rooted in the spiritual force of excommunication[xi]. Pope Gregory VII excommunicated Emperor Henry IV in 1076 and instigated an uprising of the populace, which forced Henry to plead forgiveness and absolution. A parallel of such an action can be seen when Maharaja Ranjit Singh converted his licentious relationships with Mohran Bibi and Gulbahar Begaum into proper marriages[xii]. If an excommunicated noble remained defiant, the church imposed an interdict. This closed the churches throughout the noble’s realm – marriages could not be performed, nor could the dead be buried in sacred ground. Few nobles dared risk the rebellious fury that such a decree would arouse in their subjects. By the 13th century, Pope Innocent III[xiii] made extreme claims to the effect that the Holy Roman emperor (state) was subordinate to the Pope (church) because of the relative significance of the different jurisdictions given the two institutions. Wilson[xiv] reported three types of relationships between church and state:

• The first extreme is the subordination of politics to religion, as in a ‘hierocracy’ or rule of priests as the guardians of divine mysteries.
• The second extreme entails the subordination of the religious institutions to the political regime, as in Caesaropapism[xv].
• In between the above two extremes, we have examples of various relationships ranging from an Erastian[xvi], or state-dominated church, to a theocratic political order, in which rulers are closely monitored by guardians of the dominant religious tradition, as in Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran.

Besides the complete domination of the church during the Middle Ages (500-1500 CE) where every Christian had to give a share of his earnings and income to the church; every serf peasant had to give half of their time for all types of manual work for the church. So, historically, the confluence of religious and political power in one person was a special attribute of the Abrahamic system.

There is a need to explore briefly the historical conditions with respect to the declaration of Meeri-Peeri, the effect of its development, insertion, absorption, and digestion in Sikh Panth in the intertemporal sense as well, including its contemporary consequences. This concept played a critical role in the gradual transformation of a Bhakti Sect, which denies the supremacy of Agam and Nigam from its inception stage, into a military-political unit.
The Sikh Panth was started by Guru Nanak Dev under traumatic circumstances of foreign invasions, to strengthen societal roots by blending and combining elements of various Bhakti Saints. The SaptaSindhu area was under continuous attacks after the 11^th century, which disturbed and destroyed the northwestern territory of Bharata; it is safe to say that militarization of this Bhakti movement has influenced the SaptaSindhu area in numerous ways in the last five centuries.

The historical framework of Meeri-Peeri:

The torturous martyrdom of the fifth Guru Arjan Dev in 1606, at the command of fanatical Mughal Emperor Jahangir, was a critical juncture in Sikh history. Guru Hargobind was only eleven years old at the time of the martyrdom of his father, Guru Arjan Dev. Perhaps this gruesome murder by a tyrannical ruler as per the instructions of Islamic Peers prompted the succeeding young Guru Hargobind and other Sikh leaders to refocus the role of the Gurus and Sikhs. The juvenile Guru and his group of advisors decided astutely that the panth had to fight for its survival or be destroyed by the fanatic Mughals who were repressively converting the predominantly Hindu society, the base of Sikh Panth, to Islam.
He was faced with two choices: either to let the Muslim tyrannical rulers, subordinates, and fanatical clergy annihilate Sikhism or to fight the tyranny. With an elaborative arrangement of the revenue system through Masand and a sizeable number of soldiers at their disposal, Guru Hargobind chose to fight back, showing political acumen, and manoeuvred Sikhism on its course chartered by Guru Nanak through the initial crucial stages. If we examine this transformation, we can separate certain aspects of the Sikh Panth which point to the basic idea of Meeri-Peeri in the embryonic form being present in Sikh Panth since its inception. Meeri-Peeri is a declaration and demonstration of power that was already there, power acquired through the process and institutional structured arrangement of religious and political nature.
Sangat, Pangat, and Langar, which were established by Guru Nanak Dev form the substratum seed which finally bloomed as a tree in the form of Meeri-Peeri. There is a Sikh Ardas, specifically to signify this:

“Degh tegh Fateh, bihrd kee paaej, Panth kee jeet”

The word “degh” means “Large cooking pot”. The word “tegh” means “sword” or “kirpan“. Therefore, “degh tegh” in this context refers to the concept of serving food in Langar and protecting Sangat and Pangat. These socio-political systems assured that everyone in the ‘Panth’ must have food and no one’s life is in danger within the community i.e. Sangat, to feel safe, as sovereign power lies within Sangat; and its sovereignty is protected by the sword (Tegh) of community i.e. Pangat.

In Chaubis Avtar, which is part of the Dasam Granth, Guru Gobind Singh says: “Degh Tegh Jag Maih Dou Chleha” which means “May both the kitchen and the sword prevail in the world”. In this line, the Guru conveys that the Langar to feed the poor, and the Tegh i.e. the sword to teach the tyrant a lesson, should go simultaneously. The concept of “Meeri-Peeri” is a further clarification and enhancement of the term “Degh Tegh” which was prevalent during the time of the first five Gurus of Sikh Panth. It is not wrong to settle that Guru Hargobind instilled an enthusiastic life force that pushed the Sikhs to develop into a full-fledged complete army of confident soldiers which finally culminated in the formation of Khalsa as introduced by Guru Gobind Singh, later on.

The official proclamation of Meeri-Peeri in Sikh Panth:

Sixth Sikh Guru Hargobind officially proclaimed “Meeri-Peeri” at the time of his first appearance as Guru in his succession ceremony, where he presented himself in a majestic, and somewhat royal, manner. He wore two Kirpans, one to symbolize Meeri i.e. temporal authority, and the second to symbolize Peeri i.e. spiritual authority. According to McAuliffe, the Guru reported to Bhai Buddha: “It is through thine intercession I obtained birth, and it is in fulfillment of thy blessing that I wear two swords as emblems of spiritual and temporal authority. In the Guru’s house, religion and worldly enjoyment shall be combined.”
Adornment of two swords was a departure from the previous practice where only the “salli” symbol of spiritual power was worn by the preceding Gurus. Beyond any dramatic illustration, the grandeur of Guru Hargobind on the day of the commencement of his Guruship is better captured by the much respected Dhadis-style court poets Bhai Nathmal and Abdullah, as follows:

“Do talwara badiyaan, Ik meer di, ik peer di,

Ik azmat di ik raj di ik rakhi kare vazeer di

Himmat bahaan kot-garh, Darvaza balakh-bakhir di,

Pagg teri ki Jahangir Di!”[xvii]

The adoption of the term “Meeri-Peeri” in Sikh tradition was actually a declaration of the intention to establish their own territory of influence in the peculiarly fanatic Semitic rule controlled from a foreign land with an objective to take possession of every possible resource, and use of humans as fodder to achieve religious goals in Bharata. One may infer that the idea of establishing their own state was inspired by the Khilafat of Khalifa, where the political and religious powers are vested in a single person. Guru Hargobind by wearing the two kirpans of Meeri and Peeri skillfully established the importance of Religion and State. Hereinafter this term as a basic principle influenced the thought process and governed Sikh Panth’s social structure, political behavior, communal organization, leadership, and politics. Evidently, the Guru‘s concept of Meeri-Peeri and motivation to assume the dual role of Meer and Peer was to challenge religious coercion, political tyranny, and social oppression, and ensure peaceful and prosperous co-existence for the Sikhs.

Dr. Jai Dev Singh represented the concept of Meeri-Peeri in Sikhism as:
“In Sikhs, Meeri Peeri has great significance. At the time of his coronation, Guru Hargobind asked Baba Buddha Ji to get him two swords and put the traditional Salli away with profound respect. The two swords represented Meeri and Peeri, respectively. He wore two swords, one on each side, completely separate from each other meeting briefly at one intersection only, thus symbolizing that the two powers were separate altogether and yet so close they had to exist in life together. Guru Hargobind tried to separate Meeri and Peeri, considering both as fundamental central parts of life. But why Kirpan and not any other symbol? Kirpan as the symbol of Meeri-Peeri is an interesting aspect. The kirpan constantly reminds the Sikh of three things. First, of his responsibility to confront injustice and oppression, both as an individual and as a member of the Sikh society. Second, the use of force, to the extent necessary, is permitted. The third reminder is equally significant, namely, that the Sikh society should never shirk its socio-political responsibilities, nor decline into monasticism, withdrawal, or asceticism.”

‘Salli‘ was ousted from the Guru’s adornment with respect. As a reminder, the Sikh community celebrates this ceremonial occasion as Meeri-Peeri Divas. Some historians suggest that the adornment of the dual role of Meeri-Peeri was not welcomed by all and was misinterpreted or misunderstood by some at the time. However, the four defensive battles in the years 1628, 1630, 1631, and 1634 against the aggressive Muslim forces, validated the decision.

Effect of Meeri-Peeri on Sikh Panth:

The proclamation of Meeri-Peeri as an integral part of Sikh Panth led to several changes, as it provided a theoretical platform for already existing armed groups to completely transform into a military organization. It led to rearrangement within the Sikh Panth where the bhakti aspect started shrinking. However, such transformations were not unusual in other historical contexts having the same political elements. Guru Nanak identified himself with the lowest of the low born; was so pained to see the devastation caused by Babar’s invasion that he went to the lengths of humbly remonstrating with God. Guru Arjan also said:
“The ‘bearded’(tyrant) that vents his wrath on the poor of the world; Is burnt in the fire by the Transcendent Lord. For, perfect is the justice of the Creator Lord.” And to recall again: “I accept only the saints and punish the evildoers; yea, this is how I discharge the duties of the keeper of God’s Peace.”

Meeri-Peeri was the ideological basis of Guru Granth Sahib when Guru Hargobind declared to the Maharashtrian saint Ram Das that he was “Internally a hermit, and arms mean protection for the poor and destruction for the tyrant.” Guru Gobind Singh, describing the attributes of God, said:
“Thou bestowest happiness on the good, Thou terrifiest the evil, Thou scatterest sinners, I seek Thy protection.” “God ever cherisheth the poor, saveth saints, and destroyeth enemies.”
Again, he spoke of God as “compassionate to the poor, and cherisher of the lowly.” Thus, “cherishing the poor” and “destroying the tyrant” are, according to Sikhism, God’s own mission. The passive desire to destroy tyrants converted into active participation in destroying evil forces, this is how Meeri-Peeri began to function as a catalyst for the socio-political transformation of Sikh Panth into a political force. Later on, the establishment of Khalsa in 1699 further strengthened the Meeri aspect as illustrated by the slogans: “Raj Karega Khalsa” and “Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh” both as a war cry and manifestation as well as imposition of intent that ‘Khalsa’ as an offshoot of Peeri will rule as Meer.

The new formation increased the military might of ‘Misl‘ which resulted in acquiring a state under the leadership of Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Sukerchakia Misl. The coronation of Ranjit Singh as Maharaja of Punjab demonstrated that Meeri rights had the sanction[xviii] of ‘Panth Khalsa’; the earthly sovereign for Ranjit Singh’s government as ‘Sarkar Khalsa[xix]’; and court as ‘Durbar Khalsa[xx]’. The most notable aspect was the engraving of ‘Nanaksahi[xxi]’ on coins. The Sikh-Muslim battles, and thereafter the Anglo-Sikh wars may be attributed to the recognition of Meeri-Peeri.

There exists an interesting relationship between the Christian concept of the Kingdom of God, the Islamic concept of Khuda-E-Khilafat, and the Khalsa Raj in the Sikh Panth.
In order to create the Kingdom of God, the Christian missionaries created a model where the economic interest and the sovereign interest of the Papal monarchy go in alignment; they also added state power within the larger umbrella of Christianity and started using it as the basis of the spread of Christianity outside of Europe. Although, the success of establishing any such kingdom is still a matter of debate.

Similarly, in Islam, Sharia commands Muslims to proselytize and every Muslim is under textual obligation to participate in creating Darul Islam, which is actually Khuda-E-Khilafat. Islam has a concept, called Jamaat, which is a typical combination of religious scholars and warriors – converting those who preach the idealistic strict adherence to Islamic values in social institutions, into foot soldiers to conduct their activities as Gazi of Islam – ideal to execute and achieve Darul Islam.

At the time of the creation of the Khalsa sect within the internal structure of Sikh Panth, the interweaving of Khalsa Raj by the war cry of “Raj Karega Khalsa“, was actually an attempt to claim sovereignty. This also discloses the answer to the pertinent question of whether the establishment of their own state where the Sikh Panth reigns supreme, is a manifestation of Abrahamic tendencies to control social order by regulating, managing, controlling, and directing the power of the state under the control of Peer.

The structure of the Christian execution machinery is also on similar lines. Christian religious warriors are dutybound to bring the light of Christianity to the Non-believers and pagans. It goes hand in hand with other mechanisms such as the army, social institutions, religious institutions, and service in the form of hospitals, education, etc.

Jattha in Sikh Panth is another example of an Abrahamic socio-political system where the religious warriors of Sikh Panth execute ideals similar to those of Jamaat and Missionaries. The prime objective of Jattha, under the leadership of Jathedar, is to induct Sikhs into Khalsa Panth under strict adherence to the rules of the Amrit Chakan ritual. For the purpose of adherence to the requirements of Seva, they serve langars and invest in Guruseva, education, etc.

In totality, if we try to visualize the similarities between Jamaat, Missionaries, and Jattha-Bandi, the reason, methods, and objectives of all these three methods in different socio-religious setups are aimed to achieve the fabled Kingdom of God, Khuda-E-Khilafat and Khalsa Raj in their respective spheres.

Contemporary aspects of Meeri-Peeri in Sikh Panth:

Perhaps the most interesting and intriguing aspect, which gained several sizeable dimensions after the departure of Christian imperialist forces, is the demand for a separate Sikh country; the genesis of which can be found in Meeri-Peeri and associated conceptual frames. The association with British imperialist forces after the Anglo-Sikh wars increased the role of Sikhs in the British Raj, specifically in the British armed forces. This and other such factors formed the basis for the demand for a separate country by the Sikh leadership. The demonstrative aspect was to preserve religion, language culture, and distinct identity. However, as per the Memo to British Government, Sikhs claimed that on the basis of religion, they are a separate identity and a force, and therefore, a separate homeland must be carved out for the Sikhs. Their main argument was that they should be a distinct nation on the basis of their religion, as well as their economic, historical, and military contributions to the British Raj. Sikhs of Majha and Central Bari doab were the main military strengths of the British government. The Sikhs preferred to have Jullundur and Lahore Divisions and Montgomery and Lyallpur districts of the Multan Division, and some Sikh-dominated geographically adjacent districts of the Ambala division. The Sikh claim was rejected as it was invalid on the basis of the first two ToRs decided by the Britishers for the demand of a separate country – Sikhs did not have numerical superiority in any district and their entire population was dispersed. The Muslim population was 62.5 % in Lyallpur, 69.1% in Montgomery, 70.4 % in Gujranwala, and 62.05% in Lahore. Moreover, none of the Tehsils of these districts had a Sikh majority; even Nankana Sahib had a 74.3 % Muslim population.

This brings to light an entirely different version of Sikh dominance and demand for a separate nation – that even after enjoying Meeri-Peeri for quite a considerable time, the Sikh presence remained numerically inconsequential; the number of Hindus was also quite high in these districts. Similarly, after the partition of Bharata, in the Punjab of Bhartiya side, the Sikh population remained less than the number required for a simple majority. However, this did not dissuade the Sikhs from their demand for a separate nation. The movement reared its head again in the 1970s, this time through terrorism with active guidance, aid, and control from Pakistan. Punjab watched helplessly as terrorism with an explicit declaration of war for a separate country, in connivance and collusion with Pakistan, tore it apart.
Here again, the war cry was “Raj Karega Khalsa.” However, timely intervention by the security forces destroyed the evil axis of terrorism. The massive failure of the terror-oriented movement led to some soul searching within the Sikh Panth and created space for sane voices who wanted to interpret the Meeri-Peeri and its auxiliary concepts in consonance with ‘Nanakian Philosophy.’

There is a need to broaden the interpretation as a narrow interpretation may lead to the demand for an independent country yet again. There are serious attempts within the Sikh Panth to make Meeri-Peeri contemporaneous[xxii]. There also exists a  struggle for supremacy between the Sikh clergy and the Sikh polity on various issues. At the time of the celebration of the Tercentenary of Khalsa in 1998, the Peeri started the implementation of the Nanak Shahi calendar. There is an ongoing dispute within the multiple institutions of the Sikh Panth, namely the Damadami taksal, Darbar Sahab, Akal takhat; as well as other Sikh Panthik bodies such as the SGPC playing an interesting role. Without going into details of these conflicts and disputes, it can safely be assumed that there exists a struggle between Peeri (Sikh clergy) and Meeri (Sikh polity), which pushes these bodies to design newer means to earn legitimacy within Sangat.

Conclusion:

The political and social activities of Sikh Gurus and Saints were not central to their core activities; which were triggered, conditioned, and affected by their contextual experiences. With the growth of Meeri-Peeri in the Sikh order, Meeri is absolutely legitimate for undoing unjust orders, but in order to remain pure it must remain tied down to Peeri. Meeri is the means to an end and not an end in itself; the end is Peeri i.e. the spiritual goal of following the teachings of the Gurus. Combination of Meeri-Peeri does not envisage a theocratic system of government. Among the Sikhs, there is no priestly hierarchy. Secondly, as is evidenced by the Khalsa rule in practice, first briefly under Banda Bairagi and later under the Sikh misls and Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the form of government established was religiously neutral. Peeri, representing religion, did provide moral guidance to the state representing Meeri, and the state provided protection and support equally to the followers of different faiths. Ironically, in literature, the concept of Meeri-Peeri is interpreted contextually, with contrary elements to that which is given in the Nanakian Philosophy – maybe as a response to extremely demanding and traumatizing circumstances. The literature supports the upper hand of Peeri over Meeri, and at the same time accepts that Peeri cannot be disseminated and popularized without the help of the state. The transformation of Meeri-Peeri into Sikh nationalism is unwarranted and not as per the Nanakpanthi philosophy. It was purely a contextual response of the Sixth Guru to stop the tyranny of Muslim forces. A lot of damage has already been done to Sikhism at multiple different levels. It is high time the Sikh intelligentsia interprets the Meeri-Peeri concept in Sikhism; to contain further damage thereby setting an example for peaceful living for future generations of the Sikh Panth.

References:

[i] A member of religion (called Sikhism) that developed in Punjab in the late 15^th century and is based on belief there is one God. Page 1431 Oxford advance 8^th edition dictionary.

[ii] Sikh Panth refers to the entire society, community, fellowship, or religious body of Sikhs all around the world.

[iii] A group of people including Arab and Jews page 526 Collins English dictionary by Harper Collins.

[iv] Connected with the meaning of words and sentences. 1389 Oxford advance 8^th edition dictionary

[v] The study of the origin and history of the word and their meaning page 519 Oxford advance 8^th edition dictionary

[vi] As Emir page 46 the title given to some muslim ruler page 496 Oxford advance 8^th edition dictionary

[vii] Peer or Pir Persian. Lit. ’elder’ is a title for a Sufi spiritual guide. They are also referred to as a Hazrat from Arabic Romanized Haḍra and Sheikh or Shaykh, which is literally the Arabic equivalent. The title is often translated into English as “saint.” In Sufism a Pir’s role is to guide and instruct his disciples on the Sufi path. This is often done by general lessons called Suhbas and individual guidance. Other words that refer to a Pir include Murshid Arabic‎. lit. ’guide, mentor’ and Sarkar Persian‎, lit. ’master, lord’. Newby, Gordon (2002). A Concise Encyclopedia of Islam (1st ed.). Oxford: One World. p. 173. ISBN 1-85168-295-3.

[viii] Connected with Poppe’s authority Page 1100 Oxford advance 8^th edition dictionary. Pope as Monarch.

[ix] See the similarity with two swords of Sikh religion.

[x] During his pontificate he called for strict Catholic orthodoxy, more assertively demanded obedience to papal authority, and, consequently, struggles with Eastern Roman Emperor Anastasius I and the patriarch of Constantinople

[xi] A person guilty of offense against the church was expelled from it, and all Christians, even members of his family, were forbidden to associate with him.

[xii] Ranjit Singh Maharaja of the Punjab by Khushwant Singh.

[xiii] Innocent III | pope | Britannica

[xiv] Wilson, John F. 1998. Church and State

[xv] Caesaropapism | political system | Britannica

[xvi] a supporter of the doctrine that the state should have supremacy over the Church in ecclesiastical matters.

[xvii] Miri-Piri and Sikh Leadership: What Can We Learn? | Sikh Net, https://www.sikhnet.com/news/miri-piri-and-sikh-leadership-what-can-we-learn.

[xviii] Page 37 Ranjit Singh Maharaja of the Punjab by Khushwant Singh.

[xix] Page 36 Ranjit Singh Maharaja of the Punjab by Khushwant Singh

[xx] Ibid.

[xxi] Ibid.

[xxii] An excerpt from Gurdwara Lecture on July 10, 1983, by Siri Singh Sahib, Yogi Bhajan “Miri-Piri ka badshah, Miri-Piri’s king means I am the king of Miri-Piri when I subject my ego to my dharma. It should be very well understood by you. If your ego workout your dharma, your ego workout your word, your ego workout the whole universe for you, you are not doing anybody a favor or you are not doing anybody a thing. Because you have not done the potential religious thing to safeguard and separate yourself from damaging you. Because you can become your own enemy. Miri-Piri ke badhsha. That is what Guru Hargobind has said. Guru Hargobind has never, never, ever been explained at all. Except Akal Takhat belongs to Guru Hargobind; Miri-Piri ke badhsha; bandhee chor; all adjectives. But nobody explained the subjectiveness of it.