Gurus and nepotism

[truthseeker546]

Hi all,

I have recently re-visited biographies of the 10 Gurus, one thing that struck me this time round was this strong presence of nepotism in later gurus. The first Guru, Guru Nanak rejected his own children to favour an outsider, after putting him through really testing tasks. However, the later Gurus seemed to bestow Guruship to their family members only without any sort of stringent tasks such as the ones set by Guru Nanak. This of course was the reasons for much internal fighting and the root cause of many schisms within Sikhism, the lasting effects of which the Sikh community still feels today.

How do Sikhs reconcile this problem?

[chatanga1]

20 hours ago, truthseeker546 said:

 The first Guru, Guru Nanak rejected his own children to favour an outsider, after putting him through really testing tasks.

Guru Nanak did not reject anyone. They all simply failed the tests that Guru Ji set, except one person.

 

 

20 hours ago, truthseeker546 said:

I have recently re-visited biographies of the 10 Gurus

Re-re-visit the biography of Guru Amardas Ji.

There you will get your answer to

20 hours ago, truthseeker546 said:

However, the later Gurus seemed to bestow Guruship to their family members only without any sort of stringent tasks such as the ones set by Guru Nanak.

by reading the sakhi of Bibi Bhani Ji.

[amardeep]

I think there were practical reasons for mainting the gurgaddi within the family also.

The early Gurus set the example that virtue is always above blood relations. It does'nt matter what family ,caste or lineage you belong to - what makes you worthy of Guruship and leadership is your personal virtues.

The early gurus set examples of this by choosing non-family members as their successors.

This fine principle however started leading to practical issues due to the politcal laws around in India.

When Guru Nanak bestowed Guruship to Guru Angad he handed him a pothi and some coins. This symbolised a transfer in power in terms of spirituality as well as the practical affairs of the community. Baba Sri Chand was outraged that he was not given the gaddi and due to the Mughal laws of the time  - which state that a son will inherit his fathers possesions - it was only a matter of time before Guru Angad had to leave Kartarpur Sahib and hand it over to Baba Sri Chand. As the son of Guru Nanak he had a legitimate right to the city in the eyes of the Mughal authorities. This meant that Guru Arjan had to start from zero and build a new city - khadoor sahib - from where power, revenues etc would be extracted.

Likewise Guru Amardas had to leave Khadur Sahib due to Guru Angad's sons making claims to the gaddi and community .

This kept happening over and over again. Around Guru Arjan's time we start seeing a consolidation of power within his lineage (starting as early as Guru Ram Das though) and from there onwards the gaddi was kept within the family.

The nakli "Gurus" of the later period were not as strong or established as the early nakli gurus were. This was due to many of the later nakli Gurus not having any financial basis/cities from where they could extract revenues. These were already and by large in the hands of the real Gurus.

 

So in short - The early Gurus set the example that virtue is always stronger than blood. As the example had already been set early on there was no need for the later Gurus to keep emphazising this philosophy with all the problems that it kept giving in practice. At the time of Guru Arjan it was vital for the community to be consolidated rather than spending too much time arguing over who is the real Guru.

Edited May 31, 2016 by amardeep

[Guest guest]

On 30 May 2016 at 9:46 PM, truthseeker546 said:

This of course was the reasons for much internal fighting and the root cause of many schisms within Sikhism, the lasting effects of which the Sikh community still feels today.

like what?

[truthseeker546]

@amardeep

I woudl like  to start by saying I like your posts - they seem unbiased and show you are actually trying to understand / have a true conversation. Which is what a true "sikh" is supposed to be.

"I think there were practical reasons for mainting the gurgaddi within the family also.

The early Gurus set the example that virtue is always above blood relations. It does'nt matter what family ,caste or lineage you belong to - what makes you worthy of Guruship and leadership is your personal virtues. "

You admit that the latter Gurus were selected for particular political reasons. This then goes against the notion that all the Gurus were Divinely chosen, or divine themseleves (depending on your sect). The first Gurus here only refering to the first 3, all the others were related . It seems their message of "virtue is always above blood relations. It does'nt matter what family ,caste or lineage you belong to" is abrogated by the majority of Gurus. It matters who your blood relashionship is, not simply virtue alone. 

I'm suprised you fell into the same trap most Sikhs fall into and that is blaiming all their problems on the Mughals. It's like the "go to" for all the issues that happened in that era. 

I'm sure the law of the land was that children inhert the properity/wealth of their parents (as was and is the law internationally) however thats only in regards  to material wealth, not spiritual authority. 

And  the idea family memebers were selected to stop infighting is a weak one, as the infighting was made worse after the guruship was kept in the family. take for example;

Prithi chand wanted to kill his brothers son (Guru Arjun son Har Gobind) - he founded an early Schism in Sikhism -the Minas. His son stopped the 9 guru from ever entering Amristar. They were close to the Mughals and used them to exert influence over rival family members fighting over the guruship. It's interesting how some Sikhs ignore this bit of history and simply blaim the mughals, kind of like how they are blaim the RSS for the infighting in India now.

Guru Har Rai's older son Ram Rai -who would have been the next guru,  instead of taking the guruship he joined the Mughals, which lead to the very contravertial decsion of the next guru being the younger son at the age of 5. Upon his death at the age of 7 huge issues arose within familiy memebers of who should be the next guru.

Ram Rai also had guru Tegh Bahadur killed. his followers apoosed guru gobind singh - who inturn tourtured and killed them.

The tactic of keeping the Guruship within the family doesn't seem to have worked at all. it was worse in the latter Gurus time the it was in the time of the first 3 Gurus.

Doesn't this cause a problem in terms of knowing that the last 7 gurus were chosen due to political reasons over spiritual / religious superiority. ? How can they still be regarded as divine if they were so clearly chosen out of political reasons? 

Why is it that some Sikhs who were non Gurus (say Bhai Gurdas) seemed to be more learned and have done more for Sikhism then Some gurus themselves. Say for example Guru Krishan who didn't really do anything.

( I hope the above answers your quesion "Guest")

How do you reconcile this? 

 I'm not trying to offend anyone, or personal beliefs. I'm asking question to understand some things that don't make sense to me and I couldn't find in books.

 

[amardeep]

Quote

You admit that the latter Gurus were selected for particular political reasons. This then goes against the notion that all the Gurus were Divinely chosen, or divine themseleves (depending on your sect). The first Gurus here only refering to the first 3, all the others were related . It seems their message of "virtue is always above blood relations. It does'nt matter what family ,caste or lineage you belong to" is abrogated by the majority of Gurus. It matters who your blood relashionship is, not simply virtue alone.

  Not entirely.. Sikhi works on two levels - the worldly and the spiritual. In a worldly sense each of the Gurus were given the throne due to a specific external reason (in the case of the early Gurus it was due to their great sewa while in the later Gurus it was due to their sewa as well as their lineage - this is very external ). But in a spiritual sense, they were ALREADY chosen and destined to become Gurus since birth. This is regardless of whether they had externally done the sewa  or belonged to the specific family.. Their souls had been ordained so the external aspects was not the main motivation at all.... They were chosen by God to become a Guru but each of them in their worldly external dealings gave different expressions of why they were chosen. 

Quote

 

I'm suprised you fell into the same trap most Sikhs fall into and that is blaiming all their problems on the Mughals. It's like the "go to" for all the issues that happened in that era. 

I'm sure the law of the land was that children inhert the properity/wealth of their parents (as was and is the law internationally) however thats only in regards  to material wealth, not spiritual authority. 

 

Im not blaming anything on the Mughals. Im explaining the socio-political context of the time..

Yes it was related to material wealth and that is also why you see that the early fake Gurus wrest the material cities and belongings from the hands of the real Gurus... And having control of the mateiral wealth they try to impower themselves and their fake spiritual throne.

 

Quote

 

And  the idea family memebers were selected to stop infighting is a weak one, as the infighting was made worse after the guruship was kept in the family. take for example;

Prithi chand wanted to kill his brothers son (Guru Arjun son Har Gobind) - he founded an early Schism in Sikhism -the Minas. His son stopped the 9 guru from ever entering Amristar. They were close to the Mughals and used them to exert influence over rival family members fighting over the guruship. It's interesting how some Sikhs ignore this bit of history and simply blaim the mughals, kind of like how they are blaim the RSS for the infighting in India now.

Guru Har Rai's older son Ram Rai -who would have been the next guru,  instead of taking the guruship he joined the Mughals, which lead to the very contravertial decsion of the next guru being the younger son at the age of 5. Upon his death at the age of 7 huge issues arose within familiy memebers of who should be the next guru.

Ram Rai also had guru Tegh Bahadur killed. his followers apoosed guru gobind singh - who inturn tourtured and killed them.

The tactic of keeping the Guruship within the family doesn't seem to have worked at all. it was worse in the latter Gurus time the it was in the time of the first 3 Gurus

 

 

 

Now you're jumping ahead. In my earlier post I explained WHY there was a shift in terms of reasons for giving guruship. What you are doing here is a meta commentary of WHETHER it was a good idea or not...This is an entirely different debate..

Maintaining Guruship within the family eliminated a lot of problems but as you've summarised it also created some new ones. This is only natural.

 

Quote

 

Doesn't this cause a problem in terms of knowing that the last 7 gurus were chosen due to political reasons over spiritual / religious superiority. ? How can they still be regarded as divine if they were so clearly chosen out of political reasons? 

Why is it that some Sikhs who were non Gurus (say Bhai Gurdas) seemed to be more learned and have done more for Sikhism then Some gurus themselves. Say for example Guru Krishan who didn't really do anything.

 

For some it might cause a problem but I can't imagine it is for that many. I think there is a generel understanding throughout Sikh history that the Gurus were chosen by God directly, ... The fact that Guru Har Krishan was given the throne without having spend decades in sewa while knowing that this was accepted by Bhai Mani Singh and other great Sikhs of the time only underscores the fact that Sikhs knew there was an underlying, esoteric principle behind Gurgaddi....They were born with it and at some time during their life time it was made public. There are many examples to attest that the Gurus were Gurus even before the official nomination. Guru Granth Sahib contains revelations from Guru Nanak prior to him having officially been immersed in the river at the age of 30.. If he was not a Guru at the time, why did he recieve revelations and why are they kept in the Guru Granth Sahib? The letters between Guru Amardas and his young son Arjan are also contained within the Guru Granth Sahib - if Arjan was not a Guru at the time then why are they considered revelation? Because Arjan was always a Guru.

Bhai Gurdas wrote an interesting poem in regards to the "problematic" external actions of the sixth Guru, - yet his conclusion outlines the underliying esoteric principle of Guruship. It is divinely ordained.

In the first part Bhai Gurdas is contrasting the behavirour of Guru Hargobind to that of the earlier Gurus.

ਧਰਮਸਾਲ ਕਰਿ ਬਹੀਦਾ ਇਕਤ ਥਾਉਂ ਨ ਟਿਕੈ ਟਿਕਾਇਆ।

The earlier Gurus gave spiritual instructions and preached to the people in one place but this Guru (Hargobind) does not stick to one place.

ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹ ਘਰਿ ਆਵਦੇ ਗੜਿ ਚੜਿਆ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹ ਚੜਾਇਆ।

Earlier emperors would visit the house of the Guru, but this Guru has been imprisoned by the emperor! .

ਉਮਤਿ ਮਹਲੁ ਨ ਪਾਵਦੀ ਨਠਾ ਫਿਰੈ ਨ ਡਰੈ ਡਰਾਇਆ।

The sangat that comes to have Guru Hargobind's glimpse cannot find him in the palace (because generally he is not available). He is not scared of anybody nor does he frigthen any one; But he is always on the move!

 

ਮੰਜੀ ਬਹਿ ਸੰਤੋਖਦਾ ਕੁਤੇ ਰਖਿ ਸਿਕਾਰੁ ਖਿਲਾਇਆ।

Earlier Gurus sat peacefully and contented on the throne but this Guru keeps dogs and goes out hunting.

ਬਾਣੀ ਕਰਿ ਸੁਣਿ ਗਾਂਵਦਾ ਕਥੈ ਨ ਸੁਣੈ ਨ ਗਾਵਿ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ।

The earlier Gurus used to recite Gurbani to the sangat but this Guru neither recites openly nor listens to hymn-singing (because he is always on the move)

 

ਸੇਵਕ ਪਾਸ ਨ ਰਖੀਅਨਿ ਦੋਖੀ ਦੁਸਟ ਆਗੂ ਮੁਹਿ ਲਾਇਆ।

He does not keep his peaceful followers and servants with him and rather maintains closeness with the wicked and the envious.

 

So the above is the commonly criticism that was aired at the time commenting on the Guru's external appearence and actions.  Now comes the next line where Bhai Gurdas concludes:

ਸਚੁ ਨ ਲੁਕੈ ਲੁਕਾਇਆ ਚਰਣ ਕਵਲ ਸਿਖ ਭਵਰ ਲੁਭਾਇਆ।

But the truth is never concealed and that is why the Sikhs are still flocking to the lotus feet of the Guru.

ਅਜਰੁ ਜਰੈ ਨ ਆਪੁ ਜਣਾਇਆ ॥੨੪॥

Guru Hargobind has borne the unbearable (the duty of Guruship) and he has not made himself known yet

 

So again, - while on an external level things did look a bit strange - on the internal level everything was considered a part of the greater hukam and a majority of Sikhs at the time saw it this way. Thats why we did'n see Baba Buddha, Bhai Gurdass, Bhai Ghaneya, Bhai Mani Singh and others claiming the throne in the name of their massive sewa and knowledge of Sikhi and the community. They all saw the larger picture and submitted to the Guru.

Quote

 

( I hope the above answers your quesion "Guest")

How do you reconcile this? 

 I'm not trying to offend anyone, or personal beliefs. I'm asking question to understand some things that don't make sense to me and I couldn't find in books.

 

 

 

 

No worries ask all you want,

 

 

Edited June 4, 2016 by amardeep

[paapiman]

1 hour ago, amardeep said:

The letters between Guru Amardas and his young son Arjan are also contained within the Guru Granth Sahib - if Arjan was not a Guru at the time then why are they considered revelation? Because Arjan was always a Guru.

Satguru Sri Guru Ram Das jee Maharaaj (Fourth Master) and his young son Satguru Sri Guru Arjan Dev jee Maharaaj (Fifth Master).

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[truthseeker546]

I still don't agree with your answers but at least I can see where you are coming from. It still seems how a guru can be selected due to his family lineage AND be divinely chosen. Seems to be the later came in after to justify the decision. 

But thanks for answer Amardeep. :)

[Guest guest]

 

the fact that the moguls executed Guru Arjan Dev (see Jehangirs diary) and Guru Tegh Bahadur (execution outside the Red Fort) isn't up for debate. 

and which 'lasting effect' from these 'schisms' is the sikh community feeling today?

do not assume for an instant that Amardeeps opinions are representative of me or anyone else.

Edited June 5, 2016 by amardeep

[Guest guest]

P.S. Sikhs don't 'ignore' Prithi Chand etc.  You probably only heard of him because of sikh sources.  

 

[Guest guest]

also Guru's children, murdered by muslim court at Sirhind.  

[Guest guest]

On 30 May 2016 at 9:46 PM, truthseeker546 said:

the lasting effects of which the Sikh community still feels today.

again, where?

[Guest guest]

*murdered by moguls, sorry.  i should not have said murdered by muslims, unfair to muslims, apologies to any muslim who read that and had feelings hurt

[Guest Anononon]

Sikhism is a local religion native to the Punjab region of northern India. All animals are equal but some...