Dr JasSimran Kehal
The Right to freedom of religion was implemented in India in 1950. Articles 25-28 of the Indian Constitution provide the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate one’s religion. They prohibit the state from using public funds to promote any particular religion and prevent religious instruction in state-funded educational institutions. Globally, Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, guarantees freedom of religion to all individuals. Yet many countries, such as North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and China, have very poor records of religious freedom, and only about 120 countries’ constitutions mention religious equality.
It is this freedom to practice a religion of choice for which Sri Guru Teg Bahadur set an exemplary example—almost 275 years before this right became a constitutional and legal obligation. In fact, his life journey and ultimate martyrdom shattered the dream of the oppressor Aurangzeb to establish the concept of Dar-ul-Islam in India. His martyrdom not only challenged and ended the label of Dar-ul-Harb given to the Indian subcontinent by Mecca’s clerics but also contributed to the decline of the Mughal Empire.
As various religious, political, and government organizations commemorate the 350th anniversary of Guru Teg Bahadur’s martyrdom, some genuine questions arise in my mind for historians and social scientists. Although cross-questioning religious dogmas and beliefs is not conventional, being a Sikh makes it my duty to do so. After all, Guru Nanak questioned at Haridwar and Mecca, and Kabir unequivocally put the Mullah as well as the Pandit in the same dock.
First, why did the Kashmiri Pandits go to Guru Teg Bahadur to save Hinduism, even though previous Gurus had rejected Hindu scriptures like the Vedas? Did the Pandits approach the ninth Guru first, or only after being turned away by Hindu kings? It is worth mentioning that around that time, the Deccan was under the powerful Maratha rule, Mewar was ruled by Rajput kings, and nearby Jammu was governed by the Hindu Jamwal ruler Raja Hari Dev.
It is also a matter of research: were the Kashmiri Pandits the sole reason for the arrest and surrender of the ninth Guru, or were there other contributing factors that led to his torture and ultimate death? In fact, the Guru was also arrested ten years earlier on 8th November 1665, and Aurangzeb had ordered his execution. He was released after about two months on the assurance of Prince Ram Singh of Jaipur.
Poet Sainapati was one of the 52 poets in Guru Gobind Singh’s court. In his writing, Sri Gur Sobha, he describes the ninth Guru as:
प्रकट भयो गुरु तेग बहादुर, सगल सृष्टि पर ढांपी चादर।
Pragat Bhayo Guru Teg Bahadur, Sagal Srishti Pe Dhapi Chadar.
In this verse, coined about a decade or two after the ninth Guru’s execution, Guru Teg Bahadur is given the status of savior of the whole universe.
It is also a matter of investigation: where did the term Hind Di Chaadar come from? When and why was the Guru’s status downgraded from a universal savior to one with a geographical limit? In those times, Hind as a geographical identity extended from Afghanistan to Burma. Its limits have since diminished. Does that mean the Hind Di Chaadar is shrinking?
If Hind Di Chaadar is attributed to Hinduism as a religion and Guru Teg Bahadur as its savior, serious soul-searching is required. How and when did this phrase come into being? Who coined these words, and in which writing was it first published? Is it a planned ploy to bring the Gurus under a Hindutva umbrella and place them alongside thirty-three crore deities? Once the narrative is established that the Gurus died protecting Hinduism, it may not be difficult to bring the masses under the Hindu fold.
If Guru Teg Bahadur were alive in today’s era of Hindu majoritarian supremacy—where Muslims are treated as second-class citizens, subjected to daily insults and atrocities in the name of religion, and forced to chant “Jai Shri Ram”—what would have been his response? Similarly, if he had lived when lakhs of Buddhist monks were beheaded and academic places demolished, for whom would he have spread his Chadar?
Dr. Ambedkar had grave concerns about the ‘tyranny of the majority,’ considering it a fundamental threat to genuine democracy. Guru Teg Bahadur’s life struggles were aimed at establishing socio-religious democracy. From wielding his sword at 14 in the battle of Kartarpur against the Mughal warrior Painda Khan to calmly facing the sword of his executioner, Jallal-ul-Din Jallad, at 54, the ninth Sikh Guru acted against the very tyranny Ambedkar warned against.
Is it necessary to remain in the same religion as one’s birth throughout life? Guru Nanak did not think so. The first Guru denounced Hindu practices and started a different path, culminating in the formation of a new religion by the tenth Guru. The Guru Granth Sahib extensively condemns orthodox Hindu and Muslim practices. It is hard to digest that the sole reason for the ninth Guru’s martyrdom was to save the same religion against which previous and subsequent Gurus revolted.
In fact, Guru Teg Bahadur was a protector of human rights, crystal clear in his vision about conversion. He fought against forced conversion but favored voluntary conversion—a practice exemplified by his own son, who baptized the first five followers from Lahore, Delhi, Jagannath Puri, Dwarka, and Bidar into Sikhism. Millions followed through voluntary conversion, establishing one of the subcontinent’s youngest religions.
Three hundred fifty years after his supreme sacrifice—made not to protect a singular religion but to establish the free will to practice a religion of one’s choice—echoes of a Hindu Rashtra reverberate. A majoritarian atmosphere looks down upon minority religions. Voluntary conversion is termed jihad. In today’s scenario, Guru Teg Bahadur would have protected not only those wishing to profess, practice, or preach their theology but also atheists, who constitute a tenth of the global population. Against the designs of a Hindu Rashtra, he would have fought as passionately as he stood against Dar-ul-Islam. To term the great Guru a protector of a single faith belittles his supreme sacrifice and smacks of a scheme to subvert Sikhism.
~~~
Dr. Jas Simran Kehal, MBBS, MS (Ortho), has an MA in Journalism and Mass Communication and an MA in Ambedkar Thought.
