HISTORY I

NATURE OF THE
MUGHAL SIKH
CONFLICT

SUBMITTED BY: Amber Sengar

I.D.NO: 1959

IInd YEAR, B.A.L.L.B.(Hons).

DATE OF SUBMISSION: September 08, 2014

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY,

BANGALORE
 Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3

Research Methodology...............................................................................................................4

Chapter One...............................................................................................................................6

Chapter Two.............................................................................................................................10

Chapter Three...........................................................................................................................13

Chapter Four.............................................................................................................................17

Conclusion................................................................................................................................19

Bibliography.............................................................................................................................20
 Introduction
The Mughal Empire, established by Babur in1526 grew under his successors to become the
single largest Indian empire, since the rule of Ashoka. The Mughals contributed to the spread
of Islam in India and established a unique administrative system with an assertive military.
The Mughal dynasty, refers usually to the a set of five rulers in succession Babur,
Humayun, Akbar, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb each of whom contributed immensely to the
growth of the empire.

The Sikhs were the followers of Guru Nanak, the first Sikh Guru, who sought to establish a
religion of tolerance and peace in a divided medieval India. The Sikh religion was established
on the ideals of a casteless society, which found much appraisal from the lower castes and
classes in north and north-western India.
 Research Methodology
Aims and Objectives

The aim of this project is to analyse the Mughal-Sikh conflict at the various stages of its
existence, and to understand the impact of Mughal influence in the Sikh community and vice
versa.

The objective of this project is to study the social, economic and political reasons for the
conflict and deconstruct the religious policies of the Mughal emperors to examine whether
they played a role in the conflict.

Scope and Limitations

The scope of this paper is limited in the time frame of the first interaction of the Sikhs with
the Mughal Empire under till the death of Banda Bahadur, the last notable Sikh leader under
the Mughal Empire.

This paper suffers from the limitation of an inability to examine specifics in the conflict
between the Sikhs and Mughals, such as details of battles due to the expansive time frame
that has been examined and a paucity of words. For the same reason, it also excludes from its
scope, internal politics of the Sikh community.

Research Questions

1. What were the religious policies of the Mughal emperors?

2. What was the impact of the nature of Mughal economy on the growth of Sikhism?
3. What were the social and political factors that impacted the Mughal-Sikh conflict and
the growth of Sikhism?

Sources

The researcher has relied upon secondary sources such as books, journals, articles, etc.

Methodology

The researcher has used a secular interpretation of history through the deconstruction of
events and policies perceived to be religious or ideological in nature in terms of purely
political or economic choices.
Mode of Citation

The researcher has relied upon the NLS Guide to citation.

Chapterisation

Chapter 1: The first chapter deals with the growth of the Sikh faith and community, both
independently and as a result of the religious and economic policies of Akbar. This chapter
argues that the growth of the Sikh religion in its initial stages was due to the liberal policies
of the Mughal administration at that point of time and the general prosperity of the empire,
with however, the presence of certain social phenomena which the Sikh faith sought to
remedy.

Chapter 2: The second chapter addresses the conflict during the reign of Jahangir and Shah
Jahan. It examines the religious policies of the monarchs and argues that they remained
liberal, contrary to other historical writing. It is contended by the researcher that the conflict
with the Sikhs was primarily political and not a result of religious persecution.

Chapter 3: This chapter deals with the Mughal Sikh conflict during Aurangzebs time in
power and examines the role of the Khalsa in strengthening the Sikh force. This chapter
remains consistent with the previous in its interpretation of the nature of the conflict.

Chapter 4: In this chapter, the researcher studies the role of the Sikh rebellion under Banda
Bahadur in weakening the Mughal Empire and contributing to the decline of the latter.
 Chapter One
The large-scale infusion of Afghans into India in the fifteenth century led to closer interaction
between the Muslims and the regional Hindu elites. Even after loss of Afghan power, for fifty
years, the Afghans fought alongside the Rajputs against the Mughals.1

Imperialist historians often treat the Mughal invasion as a religious war and this image is
furthered by records of Baburs call for jihad.2 However, on a closer examination, the nature
of these conflicts of this period was political, rather than religious, as they have been
portrayed to be. Baburs battles were primarily waged against the Lodis, who were Muslims
themselves.3

The process of cultural integration was only furthered during Mughal rule and seemingly
reached its heights during Akbars reign. The concept of sulh-i-kul, and the gradual
emergence of a new ruling class which had a more composite character, projected a more
liberal and tolerant philosophy.4 The concept of sulh-i-kul implied equal treatment to all
religions, equal justice to all and concern for public welfare.5

Contrary to evidence, nationalist historians, on the other, such as R.C. Majumdar, however,
claim that Hindus were not given any posts of responsibility in civil and military
administration.6 Further, they claim that the Hindus were made to wear marks on their

1 S.N. Hassan, RELIGION, STATE AND SOCIETY IN MEDIEVAL INDIA, 63.

2 W.W.Hunter, THE INDIAN EMPIRE: ITS PEOPLE, HISTORY AND PRODUCTS, 290, (2nd Edition,
2009).

3 Rizvi, THEWONDER THAT WAS INDIA, 134.

4 S. Chandra, STATE SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN INDIAN HISTORY, 31.

5Ibid.

6 R.C. Majumdar, THE MUGHAL EMPIRE, 305.

foreheads and shoulders so that they could be distinguished from Muslims, thus allowing
differential treatment.7

Similarly, Sikh historians portray this period to be one of constant violent conflict between
the Muslims and the Hindus, with Hindu priests and the Mullas inciting in people a spirit of
intolerance and hatred toward each other.8 This can be seen as an attempt to glorify Sikh
religion as a distinct embodiment of love and tolerance.9 However, there exists records of
communal violence and of administrators tearing down temples to build mosques.10

The more serious internal problem during the medieval times was the deeply entrenched
hierarchical social order, which was present in both major religions. 11 Although the radical
bhakti saints as well as the Sufis emphasized on an egalitarian society based on communal
harmony and social justice, they failed to bring in large segments of society into their fold or
their way of thinking.12 Brahmins continued to maintain a monopoly over worship. Among
the Muslims, while there existed religious equality to an extent, social inequality, due to
landholdings, administrative positions and wealth, grew.13

It was within this climate, that the Sikh faith was founded by Guru Nanak founded the Sikh
faith.14 Guru Nanak travelled across the Punjab gathering a band of followers, preaching
spiritual ideals of equality, tolerance and love. He included within his folds, Hindu lower

7Ibid at 306.

8 K. Singh, A HISTORY OF THE SIKHS, Vol. 1, 27, (2ndedn. 2004).

9Ibid.

10 R.C. Majumdar, Supra note 6, at 305.

11 S. Chandra, Supra note 4, at 39.

12 S. Chandra, Supra note 4, at 39.

13 S. Chandra, Supra note 4, at 40.

14 K. Singh, Supra note 8, at 27.

castes such as the Khatris and Jats as well as lower class Muslims. 15 The origin of the word
Sikh is often attributed to the Sanskrit word for disciple, siksa or Pali sikka. The Sikh
faith was thus found on the tenets of monotheism, the institution of a guru, casteless society
and the worship of the name of God.16

The teachings of Nanak had no startling originality. Different Bhaktas and Sufis had stressed
on one or another of the tenets of Sikhism in their writing. The Sikh religion, however,
established a new institution, the Guru. The Guru was the institution through which his
disciples could communicate with God. The Guru was treated as a mentor but not as a god.
He was considered a teacher but not a prophet.17 Nanaks teachings were in Punjabi and not in
Sanskrit or in Arabic, further distancing the Sikhs from the Hindus and the Muslims. 18 The
Sikhs were thus a community who had more in common with each other than with the
communities to which they had belonged.19

Towards the end of his life, Guru Nanak appointed Guru Angad to take over as the next Sikh
Guru.20 It is important to note that the decisions of the successors of Guru Nanak were as
legitimate as his own, as was their religious teachings. The office and prestige of the
institution of the Guru became more important than who occupied it.21

Akbars liberal policies allowed the Sikh community to grow exponentially.22 They included
abolition of the jizyah and condemnation of forceful conversion from one religion to another.

15 R. Gandhi, PUNJAB: A HISTORY FROM AURANGZEB TO MOUNTBATTEN, 39.

16 K. Singh, Supra note 8, at 36.

17 J.S. Grewal, The Sikh Movement During the Reign of Akbar, AKBAR AND HIS INDIA, 244
(I. Habib ed. 1stedn. 1999)

18Ibid.

19Ibid.

20 R. Gandhi, Supra note 15, at 47.

21 J.S. Grewal, Supra note 17, at 244

Akbar extended his patronage to non-Muslim institutions. Akbar is said to have travelled to
meet Guru Amar Das at Goindwal, after hearing rumours of rebellion. 23 He was, however,
impressed with the Sikh faith and its ideals and presented to the Guru a land grant of several
villages which now constitute the city of Amritsar, the city of the Sikh Golden Temple.24

Irfan Habib, a Marxist historian, attributes the growth of the Sikhs to Akbars revenue
policies. Akbars reign was one of growth in agriculture and trade which increased the size
and the revenue of cities such as Lahore, one of the major economic centres of Mughal India.
Irrigation enabled peasants to grow cash crops.25 There was also export of shawls, textiles and
carpets.26 This economic growth led to the prosperity of the trading classes and
agriculturalists such as the Khatris and the Jats, large proportions of whom had converted to
Sikhism. This allowed these classes to increase their charitable contributions to the Guru
which in turn allowed the Sikh administrators to take up large scale projects. 27 The number of
Sikhs greatly increased during the time of Guru Amar Das. Instead of a few individuals in the
countryside, whole villages had started to convert to Sikhism. For his sermons, Guru Amar
Das targeted centres of Hindu pilgrimage such as Kurukshetra and Kashi.28

Sikhism had grown into a concrete institution consisting of three inter-related activities: a
place for worship (dharmsal), congregational worship (sangat) and community dining
(langar).29 This institution had proliferated through a system of accredited representatives, the

22 J.S. Grewal, Supra note 17, at 251.

23K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 50.

24 K. Singh, supra note 8, at

25 J.S. Grewal, Supra note 17, at 253.

26 J.S. Grewal, Supra note 17, at 253.

27 J.S. Grewal, Supra note 17, at 251.

28K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 50.

masands. The masands would look after their individual villages and bring revenue to
Ramdaspur every year on Baisakhi day.30

Thus, by the time of Akbars death in 1605, the Sikh community had rapidly transformed and
controlled large parts of Lahore and Punjab. Had Guru Arjan not taken part in Khusraos
revolt against his father, Jehangir, this growth would have perhaps continued peacefully, as
compared to the militant organisation into which the Sikhs evolved.

29S. Puri, THE ADVENT OF THE SIKH RELIGION , 67

30Ibid,
 Chapter Two
Following Akbars rule, Jehangirs reign is often perceived to be one of reversal of Akbars
religious policies and it is often argued that this was a result of the Muslim reaction to
Akbars liberal tendencies.31 This is frequently attributed to the Jehangirs accession, when he
is alleged to have placated the Muslim nobility to give up the Din-i-Ilahi, established by his
father as well as other religious policies that benefitted non-muslims.32

On closer analysis, Jehangir continued several of the practices established by the Din-i-Ilahi
including its rituals for discipleship, regulation of animal slaughter and debate. 33 Members of
Jehangirs court, such as Sir Thomas Roe, noted that his adherence to the principles of the
Din-i-Ilahi faith was not a diplomatic manoeuvre but a sincere conviction towards the faith
itself. He also continued Akbars practice of gifts and grants to Brahmins and temples.34

The sources that have usually been used to examine Jehangirs policies were his memoirs.
These memoirs were themselves addressed what is largely a Persian-reading Muslim
audience. For example, Jehangirs passage on Jain monks condemns the seorahs for being
dol-worshippers who use their temples for mischief and the lack of honour and shame among
the Banias who send their daughters and wives to the seorah houses of worship. For this, he
claims, he banished the seorahs from the empire through the issue of farmans. Jain records,
on the contrary speak of Jain monks at Jehangirs court and contain favourable portraits of
Jehangir and his son, Khurram. This would certainly not have been the case had Jehangir
actively persecuted Jains as he claims to have done. Thus, what we see is an attempt to exalt
his status as a Sultan who could condemn heresy and scandal.35
31M.A. Ali, MUGHAL INDIA, - STUDIES IN POLITY, IDEAS, SOCIETY AND CULTURE, 184.
(1stedn. 2008)

32Ibid.

33Ali, supra note 30, at 187.

34 Ali, supra note 30, at 189.

35 Ali, supra note 30, at 189.

It is with this view that we must view Jehangirs accounts of execution of Guru Arjun in the
Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri.36 As opposed to Jehangirs account, the Jesuit records of this event do not
even mention an order for execution. They attribute Guru Arjans death to repeated
harassment by Mughal officials for failing to pay a fine of 250,000 rupees imposed on him
for partaking in Khusraos rebellion, rather than a royal order from Jahangir himself.37

Nevertheless, Sikh tradition considers the death of Guru Arjan an act of religious persecution
and not punishment to a political dissenter. Historians such as Majumdar claim that this is so
because the Sikhs at that time had only formed a religious society and that they had no
political consciousness. 38

During Guru Arjans time as the guru, Guru Nanaks teaching had been compiled in the
Granth. Nanaks way of life had become the way of life of communities of Sikhs scattered all
over northern India. The Sikhs had become conscious of the fact that they were now neither
Hindus nor Muslims but formed a third community of their own. 39

As a result of the death of Arjun, the Sikh community consciously moulded a new identity for
itself under the next guru, Hargobind. He started welcoming gifts of arms and horses rather

36TUZUK-I-JAHANGIRI, (Trans. Alex Rodgers, Ed. Henry Beveridge 1909) InGobindwal on

the bank of the Beas river, there was a Hindu named Arjan, who by assuming a garb of a
guide and instructor had made a large number of simple Hindus and even ignorant foolish
Muslims into followers of his own ways and practices. They called him guru, and from all
four sides fools came to him and expressed their faith. For three or four generations, this shop
had been kept warm. Several times it crossed my mind that this false shop must be brought
into the fold of Islam. At the place where he resided, Khusrao too set camp. He went and saw
Khusrao and put a saffron mark on his head. When this incident was reported to my court, I
knew of his falsehood, I ordered that he should be brought to me, and handed over his
habitations, houses and children to Murtaza Khan. I then ordered that he be capitally
punished.Available at https://archive.org/details/tuzukijahangirio00jahauoft.

37Rizvi, supra note 3, at 136.

38R.C. Majumdar, Supra note 6, at 309.

39K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 56.

than money and built a fortress, known as Lohgarh, at Amritsar.40 Religious discourse was
replaced by plans of military conquest. With the number of Sikhs increasing, reports were
sent to Jehangir, who in turn ordered the capture of GuruHargobind for non-payment of the
fine due from Guru Arjan.41 The Guru was imprisoned for a year after which he resumed his
martial activity. With his army, the Guru included two hundred Pathan mercenaries. 42 This
was possibly an attempt to demonstrate that the struggle was against the empire and not
against Muslims. Further, the Guru established a base at Kiratpur through a land grant from
the Raja of Bilaspur. No other conflicts have been reported till 1628, by which time Jahangir
had died with Shah Jahan replacing him as the emperor.

Contrary to the writings of the Imperialist historians, Shah Jahans rule did not see a reversal
of his predecessors religious policies. In his reign, lasting thirty years, he continued to
appoint and promote Rajputs in the civil and military administration. 43 About 18 percent of
the Mansabdars under Shah Jahan were Hindus. Though he did give an order in his sixth
regnalyear for the destruction of temples, grants for Madan Mohan temple and the Vrindavan
temple were renewed.44

In 1628, a Mughal hunting party happened to pass by Amritsar when Shah Jahans men
skirmished with a few of the Gurus soldiers. Guru Hargobind was ordered to be arrested. 45
The Mughal guards sent to arrest the Guru, happened to arrive at the Gurus daughters
wedding, where they plundered his property. These men were duly captured after which the
emperor did not further pursue the Guru.46

40R.C. Majumdar, Supra note 6, at 310.

41R.C. Majumdar, Supra note 6, at 310.

42Shahabuddin Iraqi, The Rise of Politics and Armed Resistence in Sikhism, 48(4) ISLAMIC CULTURE 2004, 87.

43Ali, supra note 30, at 202.

44Ali, supra note 30, at 202.

45K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 56.

In 1630, the Gurus forces again clashed with Mughal troops near Lahira. The Mughals were
defeated after which the Guru moved into the wilderness for a brief period to avoid conflict
with the reinforcements. The Guru returned to Kartarpur where the Imperial army was once
again defeated.47

Shah Jahan did not further pursue the Sikhs in any battles or persecute the
community.48Neither did he maintain contact with them, as opposed to his successor,
Aurangzeb. The two battles fought between Mughal soldiers and the Sikhs at this time, could
hardly be attributed to any religious reasons. Nationalist historians such as NilakantaSastri
dispute this point, arguing that Shah Jahan was an orthodox Muslim with a deep hatred for
the Sikh community.49

The egalitarian appeal of the Sikh religion may be better understood in the context of the
agrarian crisis in the north India. The Mughal revenue collection system consisted of a series
of jagirdars, or nobles, and zamindars, or landowners.50Jagirdars were individual members
of the Mughal nobility who had in their service, private armies.51 The Mughal emperor was
allowed to call upon the jagirdars in times of war to mobilise these armies and in return the
jagrdars were given posts in the revenue service and were allowed to retain a part of their
collections.52 The area left in the control of a jagirdar depended upon the size of his army.

46K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 56.

47R. Gandhi, supra note 15,at39.

48Ali, supra note 30, at 204.

49 N. Sastri, ADVANCED HISTORY OF INDIA, (1stedn. 1973) 489

50Satish Chandra, ESSAYS ON MEDIEVAL INDIAN HISTORY, 138

51Ibid.

52R.P. Rana, Was there an Agrarian Crisis in Mughal North India in the Late Seventeenth
and Early-Eighteenth Centuries?, 34 SOCIAL SCIENTIST (2006)
Under each jagirdar were several zamindars, or landowners, who were in charge of the actual
collection of revenue from the cultivators.53

The jagirdars were subject to frequent transfer and were not given any ownership of the land
they were in charge of.54 The jagirdars were in charge of implementation of irrigation and
land development plans.55 The jagirdars were ideally supposed to gauge the ability of villages
to pay taxes, taking into account famines or other conditions, and impose taxes reasonably.56
Frequent transfers, however, meant that individual jagirdars had no incentive to do the same,
and resulted them in charging high rates of taxes, indiscriminately.57

This led several peasant uprisings in north India including Awadh and Punjab.58 A large
number of peasant also disowned their cultivations due to high indebtedness caused by lack
of produce and hence an inability to pay taxes.59

The Sikh religion found much appeal among these classes of landless peasants as it took
forward the idea of an egalitarian society and sought to establish this idea through concrete
systems such as the langar.60Furthermore, the Sikh state which developed became insulated
from the Mughal state, which allowed the Sikhs their own methods of revenue collection,

53Chandra, supra note 50, at 141

54Chandra, supra note 50, at 142

55Rana, supra note 52

56Rana, supra note 52

57Rana, supra note 52

58 Chandra, supra note 50, at

59 Chandra, supra note 50, at

60Irfan Habib, ESSAYS IN INDIAN HISTORY: TOWARDS A MARXIST PERCEPTION (5THedn.

2002) 140
through a system of masands.61 Though the masandsthemselves turned corrupt over time,
their initial appeal arising from collecting charity rather than collecting revenue did ensure
the conversion of large number of peasant, particularly Jats, to Sikhism. 62 The peasant
rebellions did not subside almost until the end of Aurangzebs rule since the Mughal
administration could not find any viable alternative to the Jagirdari system.63

Chapter Three
With the death of Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb was in contention with his two brothers, Dara
Shikoh and Shuja, for the throne.64Imperialist historians perceive this war to be one in which
Dara Shikoh, the liberal who sought to bestow more benefits upon the Hindus, was
challenged by Aurangzeb, who rallied the Muslims together and fought for the faith and not
the throne.65

This could even have been merely a war cry similar to that of several Muslim rulers before
him where they claimed that Islam was threatened and that it was their duty to wage jihad.66
It is interesting to note that at this very same time, Aurangzeb pledged to Rana Raj Singh of
Mewar to protect Akbars religious policies. Moreover, even the Muslim nobility did not
unanimously align with Aurangzeb at the time of this war. On the contrary, a large number of

61Ibid

62Ibid.

63 Other Habib book

64R. Gandhi, supra note 15, at39.

65V.A. Smith, THE OXFORD HISTORY OF INDIA, 408

66Ali, supra note 30, at 202.

Rajputs pledged their support to Aurangzeb.67Nationalist historians such as R.C. Majumdar
argue that Aurangzeb believed in a destiny for himself of establishing an Islamic state, and
vociferously persecuted the Hindu population.68

Focussing on the reinstation of the jizyah or the wars with Mewar and Marwar, do not give
due credit to other secular policies carried forward by Aurangzeb. The number of Hindus in
the services in the latter part of Aurangzebs reign were larger than ever before rising from
twenty four percent under Shah Jahan to thirty three percent. 69 Even his policy of jizyah could
be attributed to the need for rallying Muslim-opinion in his favour in his conflict with the
Muslim kingdoms of the Deccan.70

Aurangzebs first interaction with the Sikhs was during the war of succession. Prior to the
war, Dara Shikoh, Aurangzebs elder brother, had served as the governor of Lahore. As the
governor, Dara maintained a healthy relationship with the Sikh community.71 Naturally,
during the war, Guru HarRai chose to side with Dara, even more so because of the bigoted
image ascribed to Aurangzeb. The first time when Dara was defeated by Aurangzeb, he fled
towards Punjab, at which time Guru HarRai provided Dara monetary as well as military
assistance.72

After Aurangzebs victory in the war and his accession to the throne, Guru HarRai was
summoned to Delhi to explain his relationship with Dara and his conduct in the war. In his
stead, Guru HarRai sent his son Ram Rai, who became a permanent Sikh emissary to the
emperor, to the Mughal court.73 Ram Rai was to serve a dual purpose to Aurangzeb, the first
to keep himself informed about the activity of the Sikhs through frequent communication and

67Ali, supra note 30, at 202.

68R.C. Majumdar, supra note 6, at 312.

69 Chandra, supra note 4, at 129.

70Chandra, supra note 4, at 129.

71R. Gandhi, supra note 15, at50.

72Iraqi, supra note 42, at 88.

the second, to create for himself a permanent ally who would soon inherit the office of the
guru.74

Had Aurangzeb in fact been the bigot that he is often portrayed to be, he would have never
aspired to rally the Sikhs to his side but persecuted them instead. The Sikhs at this time were
a powerful community controlling large parts of Punjab and Lahore, making them an
invaluable ally to establish control over these parts in one of the largest yet unstable empires
in Indian history.75

Ram Rais sycophancy to the Mughal throne led Guru HarRai to nominate his younger son,
Guru HarKrishen, to the office of the Guru, superseding Ram Rai. 76 However, Guru
HarKrishen soon passed away after nominating his uncle, Guru TeghBahadur to the office.

Guru TeghBahadur was favoured by the masses, evident from the large scale conversion to
Sikhism that could be witnessed in this period. It was in 1673 that TeghBahadur travelled to
Sirhind and other places in the north and northwestern parts of Delhi preaching to zamindars
and farmers.77 Nationalists contend that TeghBahadur succeeded in converting a large
number of Muslims, which infuriated Aurangzeb, who ordered the execution of
TeghBahadur.78

Secular historians, on the other hand, argue that the execution of the guru was not based on
any direct order from Aurangzeb but by the Qazi of Delhi on his own accord, upon the Gurus

73K.Singh, supra note 8, at 87.

74 K. Singh, supra note 8, at 87

75R. Gandhi, supra note 15, at54.

76K.Singh, supra note 8, at 89.

77K.Singh, supra note 8, at 89

78N. Sastri, supra note 49, at 509

refusal to embrace Islamic faith.79 This is established by the fact that Aurangzeb was at
HasanAbdal at the time of TeghBhadurs execution.80

Guru Gobind, the first son of TeghBahadur, took up the mantle and within a few years of
assuming office, skirmished with the chiefs and rajas of the lower Shivaik hills. This was
primarily because of the large scale conversion of lower caste Hindus, who had historically
been available for the rajas to exploit.81 Being driven out of the hills by the rajas, several
peasants were left unemployed providing the Sikhs with a standing army, which was in turn
used to reoccupy these areas.82

At this juncture, an issue we may explore is the disparity between the teachings of Guru
Nanak and the militia that the Sikhs had become under the gurus succeeding him. The burden
to justify the violence and destruction caused by the Sikhs fell upon Guru Gobind. 83 The
Gurus views on the Mughal Empire was that the temporal authority of Babur and his
successors had been used to mistreat the population and that this had to be set right to
establish the permanent authority of the guru, even if it was through the use of force.84

The greatest contribution of Guru Gobind to the Sikh faith was the establishment of the
Khalsa, which was to give the Sikhs greater unity and a definite military ideal of life. This
was necessary for three reasons, Firstly, different sects had grown up within Sikhism the
Udasis, the Minas, the Dhirmalias, the Ram Raias and others. Secondly, the masands had
become corrupt, and their avarice was responsible for the slackening of the Gurus control
over the Sikh organization. Thirdly, the Sikhs had become Hinduised in their manners and

79A. Ali, supra note 30, at 223.

80A. Ali, supra note 30, at 223.

81K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 87

82Anil Chandra Bannerjee, Aspects of Guru Gobind Singhs Career, Vol. 21 INDIAN
HISTORICAL QUARTERLY 1945, 9

83Ibid.

84 Iraqi, supra note 42, at 87

customs. In the Keshgarh assembly the Guru laid down important principles for the removal
of these obstacles.85

At theBaisakhi festival of 1699, Guru Gobind called upon the Sikhs to offer their heads. The
five Sikhs who volunteered were brought out to the gathering dressed like warriors and were
baptised with some rituals.86 The baptised Sikhs were called Singh (lion) and their new
organisation was declared the Khalsa. Now, the system that any five Sikhs could initiate
others proved to be very effective and within a short period thousands of Sikhs entered the
order which formed the nucleus of the new community of the Khalsa. The Guru declared the
Khalsato be the heir of everything he possessed.

It was at this time that the hill chiefs finally approached Aurangzeb for protection as his
vassals. The mughal and the vassal forces were combined to attack Anandpur. Assurance of
good conduct induced the Guru and his followers to leave the place by 1704. While crossing
Ropar, the Guru was attacked by some Mughal troops. He was able to reach a village called
Chamkaur. The Guru was pursued and attacked and his two elder sons fell fighting at
Chamkaur. The two younger sons fell into the hands of Wazir Khan, the Mughal faujdar of
Sirhind, who put them to death.87

When Gobind Singh clarified the happenings at Anandpur and at Chamkaur by writing a
letter, Zafar-nama to Aurangzeb and the emperor himself came to know of the differences
with the Guru, he wished to make amends.88 He sent special messengers with orders for the
Governor of Lahore to conciliate the Guru and persuade him to meet the Emperor in the
Deccan. The Guru agreed to the proposal, however Aurangzeb died in 1707.89

85J.S. Grewal, THE KHALSA OVER 300 YEARS, 34

86Ibid.

87Puri, supra note 29, at 65

88 Iraqi, supra note 42, at 90

89Iraqi, supra note 42, at 90

Sikh conversion during Aurangzebs reign can be explained in two stages before and after
the Khalsa. In the period prior to the creation of the Khalsa, the peasant rebellions that had
been prevailing throughout the seventeenth century, almost consistently added followers to
the Sikh faith.90 However, after the formation of the khalsa, conversion to Sikhism not only
meant belief in equality but actual abolition of caste. Peasants abandoned their surnames and
were given the status of a singh, a Kshatriya title in north India.91 This was a casteless
alternative to sanskritisation.92

Gobind Singh met Aurangzebs son, Bahadur Shah, at Agra and helped him in the battle of
Jajau.93 Since he was assured by the new emperor to get Anandpur back, he accompanied him
in his Rajputana in campaign. The Guru himself remained close to the imperial camp for
about a year but Bahadur Shah was still not in a position to do anything for him. The Guru
stayed behind in the imperial camp on the banks of the Godavari, where he was assassinated
by a Pathan in 1708. On this occasion, all the Sikhs and the Khalsa came together and ended
the differences between them. The Guruship, after him, was vested in the Khalsaa nd the
Guru Granth.94

Contrary to the writings of several historians, Gobind Singhs campaign was not one for
vengeance.95 This is clearly demonstrated by his willingness to form an alliance with
Aurangzeb as well as with Bahadur Shah. After the battle of Chamkaur, Gobind Singhs only

90R.P. Rana, Was there an Agrarian Crisis in Mughal North India in the Late Seventeenth
and Early-Eighteenth Centuries?, 34 SOCIAL SCIENTIST (2006)

91 Habib, supra note 60, at 141

92 Habib, supra note 60, at 141

93A.C. Banerjee, Aspects of Guru Gobind Singhs Career, 21 INDIAN HISTORICAL

QUARTERLY 1945, 9

94Ibid.

95Banerjee, supra note 74, at 11

conflict with any Mughal was when Banda Bahadur was sent to assassinate Wazir Khan. 96
This was an act against a single official and not the Mughal Empire itself.97

Chapter Four
The death of Gobind Singh did not bring an end to the conflict between the Sikhs and the
Mughals. Banda Bahadur, a personal servant of Guru Gobind, had been dispatched to toward
Delhi by Guru Gobind with the specific object of assassinating Wazir Khan. 98 When
approaching Delhi, Banda learned that Bahadur Shahs own brother as well as the Rajputs
were in open rebellion against him.99

Although the Guru had restricted Bandas role to that of a military commander for a specific
punitive expedition, Banda widened it to spiritual ministry as well. Banda gathered support
from peasants in north and central India whose villages had earlier remained relatively
prosperous and had no reason to participate in the peasant rebellions earlier but were not able
to meet the demands of the new administration which not only increased taxes to meet
military expenditure but was in extremely unstable, leaving no checks at all on exploitation
by zamindars or other local officials. Conversion under Banda was also forced in many parts.
Villages converted out of fear of being plundered by Sikhs, who did not have any other stable
source of income since the abolition of the masands.

Banda pulled this force northwards allowing him to occupy territories including Kaithal,
Sonepat and Samana. He was soon joined by armed peasants from these territories as well as
from Punjab. Banda met with a disorderly Mughal force which fell allowing him to take

96Banerjee, supra note 74, at 11.

97 Banerjee, supra note 74, at 12

98W. Irvine, THE LATER MUGHALS, 93

99Ibid.
control of the entire territory between the Jamuna and the Sutlej. He succeeded in converting
most of the population of these areas to Sikhism.100

With Bahadur Shahs defeat in the Deccan the Mughal army proceeded west towards
Rajasthan, allowing Banda the opportunity to destroy the remaining vestiges of Mughal rule
in northern India. Mughal officials tried to suppress the revolt by appealing to the religious
sentiments of the Muslim peasantry.101 Abandoning his plans to subdue the Rajputs, Bahadur
Shah ordered a general mobilization of the Mughal army calling for soldiers for a jihad
against the Sikhs.102 This succeeded in driving Banda into the hills. It was after Bahadur
Shahs death that Banda resurfaced occupying Saudhara. However, Banda was soon defeated,
captured and executed by FarukhSiyar, a nephew of Bahadur Shahs son Jahandar Shah, who
had come to occupy the Mughal throne.103

The resistance of the Sikhs and their repeated attempts at conquering parts of northern India
weakened the Mughal army to a great extent. It caused great strain on the resources of the
Mughal army, which was already embroiled in war with the Rajputs, the Marathas and the
kingdoms of the Deccan. The acts of Banda Bahadur demonstrate the influence the Sikh
community exercised over north India, It would thus be reasonable to admit to the
contributed of the Sikhs to the fall of the Mughal Empire.

100K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 108

101Irvine, supra note 79, at 94

102Irvine, supra note 79 at 94.

103K.Singh, Supra note 8, at 108

 Conclusion
An analysis of the conflict between the Mughal Empire or emperors and the Sikh reveals the
temporary nature of the conflicts between the two groups based primarily on political
considerations rather than on religious ideological differences. Instead of viewing the conflict
as one driven principally by religious fervour, the Sikh-Mughal conflict must be seen as a
product of dynamic political considerations, with each side invested in trying to garner clout
in an environment of constant societal and economic change.

The multiple clashes between the two groups were caused by events such as Guru Arjans
participation in the war of succession, TeghBahadurs growing power in the vicinity of Delhi
and other non-religious factors. Thus, it is argued that the relationship between the Mughals
and Sikhs should be viewed not as a conflict, but rather as a series of conflicts driven by
competing interests in the Punjab and elsewhere.

The history and growth of the Sikhs was constantly linked with the policies of the Mughal
Empire such as the liberal policies of Akbar which allowed the peaceful growth of the faith as
compared to Aurangzebs policies which resulted in the rapid militarisation and organisation
of the Sikh fraternity. The formation of the Khalsa, by and large a military organisation,
allowed for the Sikhs to challenge the authority of the Mughal Empire. The multiple conflicts
with the Sikh community weakened the Mughal Empire and eventually contributed to its
decline.
 Bibliography
Books

1 Athar Ali, MUGHAL INDIA: STUDIES IN POLITY, IDEAS, SOCIETY AND CULTURE (1stedn.
2008)
2 Irfan Habib, AKBAR AND HIS INDIA (1STedn. 1999)
3 Irfan Habib, ESSAYS IN INDIAN HISTORY: TOWARDS A MARXIST PERCEPTION (5THedn.
2002)
4 J.S. Grewal, HISTORY AND IDEOLOGY: THE KHALSA OVER 300 YEARS (1STedn. 2000)
5 Khushwanth Singh, A HISTORY OF THE SIKHS, Vol.1 (2nd end. 2004)
6 N. Sastri, ADVANCED HISTORY OF INDIA (1stedn. 1973)
7 Nurul Hassan, RELIGION, STATE AND SOCIETY IN MEDIEVAL INDIA (1STedn. 2005)
8 R.C.Majumdar, THE MUGHAL EMPIRE (1stedn. 1988)
9 Rajmohan Gandhi, PUNJAB: A HISTORY FROM AURANGZEB TO MOUNTBATTEN (1stedn.
2013)
10 S.A.A. Rizvi, WONDER THAT WAS INDIA (1stedn. 2004)
11 Satish Chandra, ESSAYS ON MEDIEVAL INDIAN HISTORY (7th edn. 2012)
12 Satish Chandra, STATE, SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN INDIAN HISTORY (1STedn. 2012)
13 SunitaPuri, ADVENT OF THE SIKH RELIGION: A SOCIO-POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE (1stedn.
1993)
14 V.A. Smith, THE OXFORD HISTORY OF INDIA (4th edn. 1981)
15 W.W.Hunter, THE INDIAN EMPIRE: ITS PEOPLE, HISTORY AND PRODUCTS (2ndedn. 2009)
16 William Irvine, THE LATER MUGHALS (4th edn. 2007)

Articles

1. Anil Chandra Bannerjee, Aspects of Guru Gobind Singhs Career, Vol. 21 INDIAN
HISTORICAL QUARTERLY 1945, 9

2. R.P. Rana, Was there an Agrarian Crisis in Mughal North India in the Late
Seventeenth and Early-Eighteenth Centuries?, 34 SOCIAL SCIENTIST (2006)
3. Shahabuddin Iraqi, The Rise of Politics and Armed Resistence in Sikhism, 48(4)
ISLAMIC CULTURE 2004, 87