Why do Some Sikh's Hate Muslims? The Rebellion of 1606.
Sikh Rebellion:— Religious tolerance was a key political necessity in medieval India, as it kept the Mughal Empire very stable. However during the time of the Sikh guru Angad (who attained guruship in 1539) and Amar Das (who attained his in 1552), the Sikh faith had grown increasingly more anti-Muslim. This was in spite of the fact that the Mughals had appeased the Sikhs to the point where their holiest shrines were given to them, or built, by Muslims. It is also notable that these two Sikh leaders had previously been Hindu zealots, before they had converted over to Sikhism, but their writings were still noted to have been very "Hindu in tone". Additionally, a significant proportion of Hindus had also converted over to Sikhism. This drastic demographic change within Sikhism, meant that Sikhs were growing increasingly more militant, and by the 17th century, Arjun finally made a move to involve Sikhs in the affairs of the Royal Mughal court. His support for the rebellious Prince Khusrau, Jahingar's son, angered the emperor for what he saw was treason.[n. 1] Jahangir was not a man to cross, with historians describing him being "as soft as an apple blossom" but with a fury of "iron, stone and tinder" (the emperor was even known to forcefully convert his enemies to Christianity despite being a Muslim). During the rebellion Jahangir's memoir's recall his irritation with the Sikhs, given that the Mughals had tolerated them for "three or four generations". He took action against the Sikhs when the rebellion was in full swing. Jahinger was eventually victorious, and the perpetrators were severely punished.
Arjun's Treason:— Khusrau's punishment after the rebellion was severe, and he was due to die at the hands of his father. However because of the protests of his mother, Salima Sultan Begum, and the Royal harem, Jahangir was convinced to forgive his own son. Instead, he had him blinded in 1606. Several years later, still blinded, Khusrau once again instigated another rebellion without the help of the Sikhs; this time in 1613, but also lost that (however he was still forgiven by his father for a second time). A third rebellion was almost caused by Khusrau again when his brother Shah Jahan came to power. For Arjun, the punishment was different, as he was no relative of the royals, and so faced death. Remarkably, the emperor did not kill him but gave him a fine to prove his loyalty and regret. After all, he had been found guilty of financing the rebellion and blessing Khusrau with a "tika". Arjun refused to honour it, and was summarily executed. The Guru's decision had now "inaugurated a hundred years of hostility between the Mughal emperors and the Sikh gurus". The Sikh community themselves were left alone for the crime of participation, and Jahangir tolerated them with respect, however in the eyes of many Sikhs from then on, Muslims became "their enemies". However the Sikhs tell a different story, alleging that Jahangir ordered that he be "tortured and sentenced to death" after he "refused to remove all Islamic and Hindu references from the[ir] holy book". Mainstream historians however do not take this view seriously, Jahangir for instance was not a religiously strict Muslim [n. 2]
Legacy:— Sikh legend states that Arjan "was made to sit on a burning hot sheet while boiling hot sand was poured over his burnt body" and that "[a]fter enduring five days of unrelenting torture Guru Arjan Dev was taken for a bath in the river..." and "[a]s thousands watched" he entered the river "never to be seen again". However, according to the "Oxford India Collection" Arjan was "called to account" for his treason and "mulcated"; with "a very large" fine which he was allegedly "unable to pay". He was therefore "tied up in the desert...of Lahore, and he died from the fierceness of the sun". Rajmohan Gandhi iterates how the Sikh guru's punishment can be seen in the wider context of the Sikh leaderships behaviour; "[t]he execution, and as Sikhs believe, inhuman torture of Guru Arjan in 1606 is a crucial milestone in the story of the clash between uniformity and pluralism...Acknowledging that at some point Guru Arjan...'hire[d] soldiers as well as officials'" made him a threat. Uberoi adds "the fifth guru may not have meant offence, much less to wage war upon, the emperor but he was effectively urging the claims of pluralism versus"...". The anti-Muslim principles of Sikhism were finally established when Arjan's son proposed that he carry two swords, "one to avenge my father" and "the other to destroy the miracles of Muhammad." The Sikhs later abrogated this, and claimed it really meant one symbolised temporal power (miri), and the other spirtual power (piri). From heron the "relationship would be drenched in hatred and suspicion". This explains why some Sikhs join up with Nazi groups today; communalism.
- [Short Rebellion] Munis D. Faruqui (August 27th, 2012). The Princes of the Mughal Empire, 1504-1719. Cambridge University Press. p. 33. ISBN 978-1-107-02217-1.
- [Timeline] Tmh (March 1st, 2007). Tmh General Knowledge Manual. Tata McGraw-Hill Education. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-07-061999-9.