chapter i
SICQUES, TIGERS, OR THIEVES:
Eyewitness Accounts of the Sikhs 1606-1809
Ed. Amardeep Singh Madra and Parmjit Singh
Palgrave MacMillan, 2004
A jesuit account of guru arjan's martyrdom, 1606
Father Jerome Xavier s.j. to Father Gasper Fernandes s.j., Lahore, September 25, 1606, Kelacao Annua1 das Coisas que Fizeram os Padres da Compenhia de Jesus Nassuas Missds, ed. Father Fernao Guerreiro (Lisbon: 1609. Reprint, Coimbre Imprensa da Universidade: 1931), 4: 369-70. Translated by Francisco Jose Luis.
Acritical turning point in the early history of the Sikhs was arguably the martyrdom of Guru Arjan, the fifth Sikh Guru, at the hands of the then Mughal emperor, Jahanglr. This marked the first of two Guru-martyrs and remains an evocative symbol of martyrdom in the Sikh tradition. For Sikhs, this event marked the coming-of-age of the early panth when its own critical mass had sufficiently ruffled Imperial feathers and jolted their faith-based community to seriously consider the call to arms that was championed by the martyred Guru's son, Hargobind. The origins of the primary self-image of the Sikh as a warrior have their genesis in this very act. However, from the point of view of the Imperial news writers, commentators, and diarists, the event was hardly worthy of mention.
Surprisingly, however, the martyrdom of Guru Arjan is noted, albeit briefly, in a letter dated September 25, 1606 from a Jesuit, Father Jerome Xavier s.j. to the Provincial Superior of Goa, Father Gasper Fernandes s.j. Writing in Portuguese from Lahore, the letter was later rearranged and published by Father Fernao Guerreiro s.j. (d. 1617).*
These remarks form, the earliest known European written account of the Sikhs although it is not clear that Xavier witnessed the events, and therefore 'the Guru himself. Commenting on the letter, Dr Ganda Singh notes that "there is no indication that Father Xavier knew the Guru personally or that he was an eyewitness of what he has recorded."2 The letter, which
4
"sicques, tigers, or thieves"
is a private correspondence rather than the official annual letter, covers a variety of topics commencing with notes on the pastoral activities of Jesuits working in Lahore and Agra. The contents then take a political turn as Xavier mentions the machinations at court, specifically Akbar's death and funeral, Xavier's relationship with the late emperor, and Jahangir's accession as the new emperor.3
Jahangir's reign is noted for its relative stability. However, a single event of rebellion by his son, Khusrau, marked his early years in power. This was not the first conflict that father and son had suffered, but now as emperor, there was a great deal more to lose and the errant son was placed under house arrest. Khusrau broke free from virtual confinement in court and on the pretext of visiting Akbar's burial place in Sikandra near Agra, he commenced a tour north and west through Delhi to garner support and lay siege to Lahore. In his flight from Agra to Lahore it is said that Khusrau had met with Guru Arjan, either at Goindval or Tarn Taran.4
Jahangir's own recollections of the event shed light not only on what took place but also on the motives behind the subsequent arrest and martyrdom of the Guru:
In Goindwal, which is situated on the Bank of the river Biyah (Beas), there lived a Hindu, named Arjun in the garb of Pir and Shaikh, so much so that having captivated many simple-hearted Hindus, nay even foolish and stupid Muslims, by his ways and manners, he had noised himself about as a religious and worldly leader. They called him Guru, and from all directions fools and fool-worshippers were attracted towards him and expressed full faith in him. For three or four generations they had kept this shop warm. For years the thought had been presenting itself to me that either I should put an end to this false traffic or he should be brought into the fold of Islam.
At last when Khusrau passed along this road, this insignificant fellow made up his mind to wait upon him. Khusrau happened to halt at the place where he was. He [Guru Arjan] came and saw him, and conveyed some preconceived things to him and made on his forehead a finger-mark in saffron, which the Hindus in their terminology call qnshqa (tika) and is considered propitious. When this came to the ears of our majesty, and I fully knew his heresies, I ordered that he should be brought into my presence, and having handed over his houses, dwelling places and children to Murtaza Khan, and having confiscated his property, I ordered that he should be put to death with tortures.5
Jahangir's own comments betray his long-standing desire to deal with Guru Arjan, and the incident with his rebellious son provided a justification to do so.
The extract of Xavier's letter that makes mention of the Guru commences by reasserting the Guru's association with the rebel prince, Khusrau. A striking aspect of Xavier's letter is the inference that the Guru was not tortured to death by the Mughals, as is stressed in Sikh tradition, but was murdered by a "gentile" who stood credit for the Guru's fine of 100,000 cruzados. This is contradictory to Jahangir's own diary note that refers to a clear order
guruarjan's martyrdom, 1606 5
to "be put to death by torture."6 According to Xavier, this "gentile" murdered the Guru after the surety could not be returned to him. This startling explanation for the Guru's martyrdom is in part corroborated by die only other contemporary account, namely, the Dabistan-i-Mazahib, which quite clearly mentions the method of torture as being "inflicted by the collectors" and hastening the ultimate demise of the Guru.
"When after the capture of [prince] Khusrau, His Majesty king Jannat Makani Nuruddin Muhammad Jahangir punished and mulcted Guru Arjan Mal, on account of his having prayed for the welfare of Prince Khusrau, the son of His Majesty Jarmat Makani, who had rebelled against his father, and a large amount was demanded from him [Guru Arjan], he found himself powerless to pay it. He was tied up and kept [in the open] in the desert around Lahore. He gave up his life there owing to the strong sun, summer heat and injuries inflicted by the collectors.7
Could it be that these "collectors" were associated with the "gentile"? Interestingly, this interpretation of the events of 1606 are supported to some extent by the Udasi, Seva Das, who lays some of the blame on one Chandu Khatrl, a divan (revenue official) in the service of Jahangir, who was reeling from the rejection of the marriage of his daughter to the Guru's son. Chandu is identified as feeding false reports against Guru Arjan, thereby contributing to his arrest and torture.8 Macauliffe also points to a Chandu Shah as the main protagonist in the arrest and torture of the Guru. Kesar Singh Chhibbar's earlier work of 1769 lays the blame at the feet of the Guru's elder brother, Baba Prithi Chand (1558-1618), who maintained a long-running claim for Guruship. Hari Ram Gupta discusses the matter at great length9 and counts the leader of the orthodox Islamic revivalists of the Naqshbandi order, , Shaikh Ahmad Faraqi Sirhindl (1563-1625), as a key influencer of Jahangir and his courtiers against the Guru. In a letter to Shaikh Farid Bukhari, Sirhindi says: "These days the accursed infidel of Goindwal was very fortunately killed. It is a cause of great defeat for the reprobate Hindus. With whatever intention and purpose they are killed, the humiliation of infidels is for the Muslims life itself."10
Xavier himself was no doubt under some pressure to retain cordial relations with the Mughal court to which he had been dispatched some years earlier and this may well have colored his opinions. Jerome Xavier followed in a long tradition of missionaries of the Jesuit order. The first Jesuit Rprland in India was Francis Xavier (coincidentally, Jerome Xavier's grand-ffunclc and later St Francis Xavier), who arrived in Goa in 1542. Francis Xavier Jvwas a zealous missionary on the move. In his ten years in India he established churches and congregations, and made some early links with the locals. Following his success in India, Jesuits were to be found in most Portuguese enclaves of the new trading country. They quickly impressed the Mughal emperor, Akbar, who invited them into the Mughal court. The Jesuit hope of converting him to Christianity failed miserably, but that first mission
6 'SicguES, tigers, or thieves"
spawned further forays. The third mission was in May 1555. Here, Father Jerome Xavier accompanied by Father Manuel Pinheiro and Brother Bento de Goes, arrived in Lahore and into the court of the then aging Akbar.
Xavier spent twenty years in the Mughal court of Akbar and Jahangir, witnessing the ascendancy of Mughal splendor, dispensing spiritual leadership, and becoming a remarkable scholar in Persian. Having left the court, he spent his retirement as rector to the St Paul's College in Old Goa. He died in Goa on June 27, 1617 in a fire that engulfed his room and ignominiously suffocated him while sleeping.
The section reproduced below is a new translation into English.11 In addition to the obvious historical importance of the account related to the martyrdom of Guru Arjan, the account of Father Xavier's as a narrative reveals a great deal regarding how he perceived not only Sikhs but Indic religious traditions in general. The absence of the word "Hindu" when referring to non-Muslims is a striking feature of Xavier's text. The word used by Father Xavier and in other Portuguese and Catholic accounts about India is "gentile" (port, gentio). The concept of gentile included all religious practices that were neither Christian, Jewish, or Islamic. As such it is an all-inclusive term, heterogeneous in essence and devoid of any homogeneity. The concept of a homogeneous religious tradition called "Hinduism" appeared much later at the beginning of the nineteenth century when the Mughal concept of "Hindu" met Western Orientalist scholarship and the aspirations of the new emerging elites of the British Raj. Non-Muslim inhabitants of India were Shaivas, Vaishnavas, Shaktas, Smartas, or practiced non-denominational folk religions. Any sense of an underlying unity failed to exist amongst them but for the Christian or Muslim observer they were all "gentiles" or "Hindus." Sikhs were perceived as one group amongst the gentiles even though they perceived themselves, and were perceived by others, as clearly distinctive.
Father Xavier's observation that the Sikh Guru was the equivalent of the Pope deserves special attention. The use of such a strong and unusual comparison from a Jesuit shows how important the influence of the Guru was. Sikhism's influence was originally not just restricted to the Punjab but extended to all parts of Northern India. The many Udasi and Nirmala establishments throughout Northern India are clear proof of that influence. In fact, it seems that Sikhism had much more influence than most official historiographies, Indian or Western, would let one believe.
It seems that Father Xavier projects the difficult relationship between his order, the Pope, and the court of Portugal. The terms "coitado" and "pobre" clearly show sympathy toward the Guru and his sufferings, so close to those of the martyrs of the Catholic tradition. This sympathy reinforces Father Xavier's statement about the importance of Sikhism at that period, far from being a marginal aspect of India's medieval history.
guru arjan's martyrdom, 1606 1
Father Xavier's account is, therefore, a most precious document regarding the way Sikhs were perceived during that period. It breaks preconceived perceptions of Sikh history and challenges the modern "Hindu" construct.
When the Prince [Khusrau] came flying from Agra, he passed where a gentile called Guru (Goru), who amongst the gentiles is like the Pope amongst us. He was held as a saint and was as such venerated; because of this reputation of his and because of his high dignity the Prince went to see him, desiring, as it seems, some good prophecy. He gave him the good news of his new reign and gave him a tikka (otria) on his forehead; although this man (the Guru) was a gentile and the Prince, a Moor; to the pontiff it seemed that it would be good to give this symbol peculiar to gentiles, as a sign of success in his undertaking; as the Prince was the son of a gentile woman and because of the prince's opinion of his saintliness.
The King [Jahangfr] came to know of this and after having imprisoned the Prince he ordered for the said Guru (Gorii) to be brought. Having him imprisoned, some gentiles interceded for their saint: finally they managed to get him sentenced to a hundred thousand cruzados, a petition of a rich gentile who remained his guarantor. This individual took care that either the King (El-Rei) annul this sentence or the saint have or at least negotiate that money; but in all he got frustrated; and he seized from his poor Pope everything he could find not sparing his clothes nor the clothes of his wife and sons; and seeing that all of this was not enough, as the gentiles don't have loyalty towards neither Pope or father regarding money, each and every day he gave new torments and gave new affronts to the poor saint. He ordered him to be beaten many times with shoes on his face and forbade him to eat, so that he (the Guru) would give him more money, as he was not willing to believe that he did not have it, but he did not have it nor did he find anyone who would give it to him; and thus amongst many trials, pains and torments given by the very ones who adored him, the poor Guru (Goru) died.- The guarantor tried to save himself, but he was imprisoned and killed after they had taken everything they could find.
notes
1.
Annual Relation 1606-1607 (part PV, Book III, chapter V, fos 148-51r.
Reprinted in Coimbra 1931 vol. II, 366-70). The original text of the letter is