Mughals On Vaisakhi 1699

[amardeep]

The newswriter of the Mughal government, Ghulam Mohyiuddin, reporting to the Emperor wrote:

"He has abolished caste and custom, old rituals, beliefs and supertitions of the Hindus and bonded them in one single brotherhood. No one will be superior or inferior to another. Men of all castes have been made to eat out of the single bowl. Though orthodox men have opposed him, about twenty thousand men and women have taken baptism of steel at his hand on the first day. The Guru has also told the gathering: "I' ll call myself Gobind Singh only if i can make the meek sparrows pounce upon the hawks and tear them; only if one combatant of my force faces a legion of the enemy"

[kdsingh80]

Amardeep ji

If you don't mind could you please quote the source of above and about the authenticity details of above

[dalsingh101]

This is one of those frequently quoted pieces which no one has ever managed to verify or locate in manuscript form.

I'm wondering why it isn't in Grewal and Habib's Persian Sources of Sikh History?

[kdsingh80]

This is one of those frequently quoted pieces which no one has ever managed to verify or locate in manuscript form.

I'm wondering why it isn't in Grewal and Habib's Persian Sources of Sikh History?

I know that's why i am more curious to know the source O/W if we will quote this on Non sikh forum then they will clearly call it a sikh propaganda with no base

[amardeep]

They can be found in

- Singh, Sangat (2005). "Evolution of Sikh Panth". The Sikhs in History. Singh Brothers. pp. 67–68. ISBN 8172052758.

- Singh, Gopal. A history of the Sikh people. Delhi. pp. 291.

[shaheediyan]

Amardeep, could you check the footnotes etc from the books to see where the above have been quoted from?

[amardeep]

I dont have the books unfortunately.

[Maha Singh]

The footnote in Gopal Singhs "History of the Sikhs" doesnt give a refference, it says:

"It is really strange that though the later historians )Sikh as well as non-Sikh) and the authors of the Rehitnamas, write, in detail about the Gurus commandments to the Sikhs, he himself nowhere does so, even though he had a long spell of peaceful time twice after the birth of the Khalsa, to incorporate his commandments in one of his compositions. The only verse he has left to posterity enunciating the Code of Conduct for the Khalsa proclaims "He who meditates on the Supreme Light night and day, and believes in not in another, has perfect love in the heart and puts not his faith in fasting, tombs, graveyards and convents, and for whom the pilgraimages consist in being compassionate, charitable, chaste and self disciplined and who recognises in all no one but the One alone and whose heart is illuminated with the Divine Light is a Khalsa, purest of the pure" (Guru Gobind Singh, 33 Swaiye). In fact, the Guru never forced his new discipline on all Sikhs, even though some of the most devout being allowed not to be baptised, like Bhai Nan Lal and Bhai Kanihyia. Thus a distinction was permitted to remain between a Sikh and a baptised Singh, and this is how till lately a large body of the Sikhs called Sahijdharis, though outwardly not confrming to the symbols of the Khalsa, yet accepted the spiritual and social code of the Gurus and remained an inalienable and worthwhile part of the Panth. The word Khalsa it may be pointed out has been used by Kabir (Kaho Kabir Ham Bhae Khalsa, Rag Sorath), as also by the earlier Gurus, notably the 6th and 9th, in their Hukamnamas to denote the Sikhs who were the special charge of the Guru as against Sahlangs whose spiritual instruction was in the hands of the Gurus deputies. Guru Gobind singh himself employed the word Khalsa in his Hukamnamas even after 1699, for the entire Sikh Sangat, not only for the initiates or Singhs"

[amardeep]

Nice Singh ji thanks for transcribing that

[dalsingh101]

The truth is that we don't really have any verifiable accounts of 1699, despite some over zealous Sikhs providing ones, and then going mental when you ask justified questions on provenance. There is a certain brother on Sikh Sangat who is famed for this! lol - I wont mention any names.

They are from the 'blind faith' school of ithiaas and twist genuine questions into accusations of lack of faith. Thing is, if we don't apply heavy critical evaluation into our historic research, then we are in danger of taking on board falsehood and perhaps even basing some of our faith around it. At some later stage, this will become apparent and can lead to serious dissonance and even a loss of faith for some.

Keep it crispy. We have to exercise our buddhi when accepting historical information and a high level of scrutiny is not neccesarily a bad thing.