Introductory - Global Sikh Studies

161
But, Jahangir held different views from those of his father. Jahangir
wrote about Abul Fazzal: “for twoards the closely of my father’s reign,
availing himself of the influence which by some means or other he
had acquired, he so wrought upon the mind of his master, as to instil
into him the belief that the seal and asylum of prophecy, to whom the
devotion of a thousands lives such as mine would be a sacrifice too
inadequate to speak of, was no more to be thought of than as an Arab
of singular eloquence, and that the sacred inspirations invented by
the ever blessed mohammad. Actuated by those reasons it was that I
employed the man who killed Abul Fazal and brought his head to me,
and for this it was that I incurred my father’s deep displeasure. 25c There
were clear political motives of Jahangir for acting against the fifth
Guru. But, his statement also leaves no doubt about his attitude
towards deviations from the shariatic concepts and practics. ‘Sheikh
Ahmed Sirhindi had made the revival of ortoodoxy something of a
movement.’ 26 Therefore, whith the accession of Jahangir to the throne,
who ‘himself was inclined towards the purification of (Muslim) beliefs
and practices.’ 27 the situation changed radically. The stage was set for
the potential confrontation to become open. It was an inevitable clash
between two conflicting ideologies which was bound to erupt sooner
or later. Rather, the events moved quite rapidly. Akbar died on October
17, 1605, and Guru Arjan was tortured to death in June, 1606. 28 Jahangir
did not want merely to punish a person (Guru Arjan). He wanted to
put a stop to what he regarded as a ‘vain affair’, the propagation of the
Sikh ideology, which ‘had flourished for three or four generations’. It
was a declared assault not only on an individual but on the Sikh
movement as a whole which posed a direct political challenge to his
theocratic state.
The Sikh Guru, including Guru Arjan, could not have been
unaware of the consequences that would follow from the ideological
line they were pursuing. Even the most ignorant subject of a Muslim
state was expected to know it, because the penalty for apostasy was a
much publicized feature of the Shariat. But, the Gurus were not prepared
to forsake their ideology and the course that ideology dictated, whatever