SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DURGAPUJA TALE

Sikh historian have, for long been baffled by the popular story of Durga worship by Guru Gobind Singh. The act, besides being repugnant to basic Sikh philosophy, so militates against the established views of the Guru as to become clearly inconceivable. In the conspicuous absence of any attempt to fathom the mind of Koer Singh, who first mentioned it in his Gurbilas Patshahi Das completed in 1751 CE, the episode has defied understanding. Even Bhai Vir Singh, who took it up seriously, eventually remained content with pointing out illogicalities, philosophical absurdities and historical inconsistencies. Students of history will, however, be grateful to him for highlighting constraints under which Bhai Santokh Singh had to include the incident in his immortal Suraj Parkash. Emphasis has been on explaining it away rather than on understanding it. An appreciation of Koer Singh's position regarding the incident appears to hold a clue to it's true significance.

Some relevant prominent traits of his work may be noted. Even a cursory reading will suffice to convince that Gurbilas is the work of one totally immersed in Hindu Mythology religious lore. An intense desire to preserve the Hindu culture is the single strand that runs prominently throughout his work and unmistakably holds it together. He is clear that Sikhi alone stands in the way of it's total annihilation by the forces of Islam. In particular he interprets the life and mission of Guru Gobind Singh as centred around this single point of resistance. He relates with obvious relish and not without exaggeration, the heroic tales of the Sikh revolution which he increasingly views merely as resistance movement. He also does not fail to record that at the time of writing it had already come within a measurable distance of success. In order to preserve it's true character and original motivation he shrewdly reiterates it's religious ideals and profusely eulogises it's leaders. Koer Singh analyses it's revolutionary content with rare insight but is unable to resist the temptation of retaining in within the Hindu fold. Perhaps it was his hope that unreserved Hindu support to the Sikh movement would not only be beneficial to Hinduism but would safely make it a movement within the Hindu fold. Significantly he mentions that he himself is a`Sikh only in name'. This is clearly the perception with which he approaches the entire question of durgapuja to which he gives much prominence.

Assertion of it's own sovereign character and the denial of the political supremacy of the upper castes were the most disturbing features of prophetic Sikhi from the view-point of orthodox Brahminism. Koer Singh has pointedly noted that it made the lowest among the low castes proficient in the use of arms and enkindled in their breasts a burning desire for self-rule. The dilemma of Brahminism was one of gathering support for the Sikhs engaged in the promising business of rooting out tyranny while at the same time containing their movement within the safe limits of dissent of orthodoxy. By way of a neat comprehensive tale, perhaps Koer Singh could have thought of nothing better than durgapuja.

Essential features of the story related by him may first be reiterated. With object of destroying Muslim rule (p.120), it was decided to secure the blessings of Durga who is considered the repository of armed might even by the principal Hindu gods, and is reputed to have destroyed powerful demon evil-doers (p.103). One Dattanand of Ujjain who, unlike other brahmins, has not completely submitted to Muslim domination, alone is reputed to be capable of successfully conducting the connected ceremonies (p.104). Eventually ten thousand leading brahmins from all the well known centres of brahminism are invited to participate (pp.103 and 109). With the Guru's financial support elaborate and expensive preparations are made.

The ceremonies start in 1685 CE and continue for four years. During the initial three years the Guru does not personally take part in worship. At the end of that period the venue of worship is shifted to Nainadevi (p.113) perhaps to better impress the neighbouring hill rajas. At the end of the fourth year devi appeared with a double-edged sword used by her for killing demon kings Sumbhu and Nishmbhu and formally presented it to the Guru (p.121). At the conclusion of ceremonies Guru expresses much gratitude to Baba Batha, leader of the Kashmiri brahmins, who is overloaded with present before being permitted to depart (p.136). An enormous amount of two crores of rupees is computed as total expenditure.

Amongst the subsidiary features of the tale are those which are particularly helpful to Koer Singh in his peculiar frame of mind. He represents the Guru as personally taking part in durgapuja in the last lap. The gods and goddesses of the Braminical pantheon are made to worship the Guru after his success in making the devi appear. They give him offerings of weapons and other items, which he would later prescribe as mandatory symbols of religion for the Khalsa.

Koer Singh’s message stands out distinctly. Hindu masses are to believe that the struggle of the Khalsa against the Muslim rule is undertaken in behalf of Brahminism and in duly approved of by all the gods and goddesses. As in signified by the gift of devi's own sword, the success of the mission is to be regarded as assured. The orthodox were to be informed that no objection was to be taken to the wielding of weapons by the Khalsa comprising of castes to whom political activity was forbidden, because the most divine of divinities had accepted to make an exception in their case. Holiest of brahmins were witness to the decision and were bound by it. The alternative of exonerating Koer Singh of inventing the entire tale deserves even more serious consideration. May be his imagination did not run as wild as we are conveniently imagining. It is possible that in spite of his obvious philosophical dilemma and despite inventing the subsidiary part, he himself was more a victim of propaganda had it's originator. The greater part of his Gurbilas is apparently a reliable account. It is quite possible to retain the essential features of this story and to read them meaningfully along with the tell-a-tale circumstances mentioned in detail by him. It’s coherence, appeal or essential purpose is not affected thereby.

The presence of Dattanand, a respected leader openly resentful of Muslim rule and who has voluntarily come from an important religious centre, is significant. Amongst others taking part in worship are mentioned representatives of prominent religious centres like, Kanshi, Gaya, Jagannath, Mathura, Hardwar, Gomti, Kishtwar and Badrinath (p.103). Attendance in thousands suggests that no opinion makers of any consequence, was left out. Representative character, long duration, wide attendance, all suggest planned action for a definite purpose by dedicated and business-like men who commanded wide respect amongst the invitees. Koer Singh mentions the continue residence of Kashmiri brahmins who had come requesting Guru Tegh Bahadur to take up their cause. Some of them departed after the conclusion of durgapuja, several others took pahul (p. 134) and adopted the Khalsa way. At least one of them, Kirpa Singh, is known to have become a martyr at Chamkaur Sahib. The above, along with inordinate consideration shown to their leader Baba Batha who is treated at par with Dattanand the master of ceremonies (p. 136), unmistakably point out that Kashmiri brahmins were the ones who managed the entire operation of durgapuja. The totality of the situation presented by Koer Singh, eminently lends itself to the above interpretation. Powerful impression, suggesting a formal or informal undertaking by at least the Kashmiri brahmins to really support for the Guru's cause, is left on the mind. There are passages in the compositions comprising the `Dasamgranth’ which clearly suggest such a possibility. The extraordinary prowess exhibited by the Guru's caste-less forces in the battles of Bhangani and Nadaun must have made them conclude that armed resistance under the Guru was a practical possibility and the only hope. That the general public did not respond as expected is not for want of ingenuity of Kashmiris or for want of striving by the leaders. The struggle itself demonstrable possessed the possibility of dignity and relief to all. Failure of the masses has to be attributed to the relentless grip of the caste system, to their total incapacity to comprehend general principles or philosophical formulations and the consequent determined disinclination to consider a cause worth making sacrifices for.

Thus we see, even if the responsibility for invention the entire tale was not to be thrown on the inviting shoulders of Koer Singh, no violence is done either to the core of the story or to the attending circumstances so carefully recorded by him. Together they read most harmoniously and appear to express the whole truth. Koer Singh is guilty of giving a definite turn by supplying the subsidiary features. May be that is primarily because he is unable to penetrate the actual mystery and seeks to give an interpretation which most suits his genius, disposition and a vision of the future. Though he did cast the first stone all our historian have been doing just that for the last three centuries and basically for the same reasons.

A word about the necessity of such an elaborate proceeding would be in place. It was a serious attempt at manipulation of public opinion undertaken solely for it's propaganda value. In that age centres of religion were also efficient centres for spread of information and brahmin priests were powerful opinion makers. Appearance of the devi was no more than a propaganda aid to carry the message to ignorant masses. Sanction of the deity they worshipped was calculated to have profound effect. devi was regarded as the goddess worshipped by all other gods. The element of mystery was certainly provided in the interest of durability, purity and appeal of the message.

Resort to this particular stratagem is not surprising as it's efficacy had been tested earlier. The proceedings conducted a top Mount Abu to legitimise the wielding of weapons by certain Rajput clans and to pave the way for their grudging admission into the privileged fold of the `twice born' in their new incarnation as agnikulas, comes readily to mind as near parallel and instructive precedent. The ceremony held to legitimise the assumption of kingship by non ksatriya Shivaji Marhatta would constitute another near parallel. Though in these cases stratagem was resorted to in the interest of beneficiaries and at their request whereas in the present case it was conceived as response to the challenge presented by Aurangzeb.

Availability of the entire medieval literature has equipped us better than ever before for understanding the idioms them current. We are also quite aware of their necessity of providing for the failure of communication which could be complete in those dark ages. We also know that they were constantly struggling to make themselves intelligible to masses steeped in ignorance. It is distressing that in spite of this we should fail to muster proper response to messages from the past. Is it because of our impatience with the modes of expression used by medieval historians? Equipped with a pseudo scientific approach, we refuse to consider anything that does not square with the notions history prevalent today. In certain recognisable circumstances what appear to be myths do hold out a definite promise of carefully concealed historical truths. A plea for adopting the above approach would not be out of place. It may very well hold a clue to lighting up many dark corners of our history.