News & Views




  I S C

  Research Projects

  About Us





Radical Bhagti Sects and The Sikh Panth

Sikhism became the vehicle of the Sikh movement whose salient features as well as the manner in which these developed, fully reflect the mandatory twin-relationship between the Sikh view of Nam Simran and the sharing of God-oriented worldly responsibility.

1. Not a ‘Sampradaya’
The Sikh Panth developed on lines different from those followed by the Hindu sampradayas because the raison d’etre of its development was different. “Hinduism presents the sociologist with a difficult task. It is questioned : how we should classify the type of specifically religious organization presented in India by certain large groups such as Vaishnava, who worship mainly Vishnu, or the Shaiva, who worship largely the mighty Shiva. The composition of Hinduism is affected by many factors, not the least of which is religion. No definition of a set of religious conceptions or practices exists to define membership in this complex body. In general, religions in India are traditionally defined under two heads — orthodox and heterodox, the outstanding of the latter being Buddhism and Jainism. A belief is heterodox which does not acknowledge the authority of the Veda and the sacred tradition, but there is within its frame ample room for an enormous variety of ‘orthodox’ conception, rites, and communities. The majority of the Hindus do not belong to any distinctive group with theological and ritual unity. They are syncretistic in their ideas and actions. Even the various Vaishnavite sampradayas are not as exclusive for example as are the Christian denominations. The reason, of course, is the absence of any unifying conception, similar to that of the Christian Church…

“Sampradaya is not translatable by the term ‘sect’ or ‘denomination’ because that implies secession from a larger body (church). The Indian term does not have so much a negative as a positive connotation, implying a group with special concepts, forms of worship, and adherence to exclusive leadership exercised by an outstanding religious personality or by his physical or spiritual descendent.”1

Max Weber comes to a similar conclusion. “In Hinduism a teaching may be orthodox without being bindingly valid… And indeed the doctrinal fluidity of Hinduism is not incidental but rather the central issue of ‘religion’ as we conceive it.”2

“Nor does affiliation with a sect bring about excommunication… In fact, the truly devout Hindu is not merely a Hindu, but a member of a Hindu sect as well. And it may even happen that while the father is a Shivaist, the son may be a Vishnuist.”3 Broader religious tolerance than this in a single religion is hardly conceivable.4

As against all this doctrinal catholicity, “caste, that is, the ritualistic rights and duties it gives and imposes, and the position of the Brahmins, is the fundamental institution of Hinduism. Before everything else, without caste there is no Hindu”.5 “In contrast to the orthodox sects, the heresy of the Theophatries consists in the fact that they tear the individual away from his ritualistic duties, hence from the duties of the caste of his birth, and thus ignore or destroy his dharma. When this occurs, the Hindu loses caste. And since only through caste can one belong to the Hindu community, he is lost to it. Dharma, that is, ritualistic duty, is the central criterion of Hinduism.

“Hinduism is primarily ritualism, a fact implied when modern authors state that mata (doctrine) and marg (holy end) are transitory and ‘ephemeral’ — they mean freely elected — while dharma is ‘eternal’ — that is, unconditionally valid.”6 In fact, the practice of Hindu dharma, ritualism, ceremonialism and custom, all converge towards entrenching the caste order. Mutual exclusiveness was predominantly caused not by social but by ritualistic factors.7 “The caste order is orientated religiously and ritually to a degree not even partially attained elsewhere.”8 The caste rules interfere “with all the relations and events of life, and with what precedes and follows life…”.9
It is not necessary to dilate that Sikhism owes no allegiance to Hindu scriptures or Brahmins, and that the Sikh Panth tears the proselytes from the Hindu fold away from the Hindu dharma and from the Hindu society.

2. Organization and Social Concern of Bhagti Sects
The contrast between the doctrinal fluidity and the social rigidity of Hinduism, to which we have drawn attention above, is relevant for comprehending the developmental pattern of the Sikh Panth.

Of all the persons usually classified as Radical Bhagats or saints, Kabir had the most widespread influence on the state of popular belief.10 Yet, what one can glean about him from Bhakta Mala or Wilson, relevant to our discussion, is scanty little. Wilson writes : “The Kabir Panthis in consequence of their Master having been the reputed disciple of Ramanand, and of their paying more respect to Vishnu than the other Members of the Hindu triad, are always included among the Vaishnava sects, and maintain with most of them, the Ramavats especially, a friendly intercourse and political alliance;…”11 It shows that the Kabir Panth, whatever the original intentions of the Master, did not develop as a distinct social or religious entity outside the Hindu society. “From this authority it appears that although the Kabir Panthis have withdrawn, in such a very essential point as worship, from the Hindu communion, they still preserve abundant vestiges of their primitive source; and that their notions are in substance the same as those of the Puranic sects especially of the Vaishnava division.”12

From the organizational standpoint, the sect is split into a variety of subdivisions. It has a few establishments spread mainly over Northern India, of which the Kabir Chaura at Benaras (Varanasi) is pre-eminent in dignity. The only activity of note mentioned about Kabir Chaura is that it is constantly visited by wandering members of the sect, as well as by those of other kindred heresies; and that the Mahant receives and feeds these visitors whilst they stay.13

Among the Radical Bhagti sects, next to Kabir Panthis, the followers of Rav Das or Ravi Dasa are probably the most numerous. But this sect is confined to Rav Das’s own caste, “the Chamars, or workers in hides and in leather, and amongst the very lowest of Hindu mixed tribes. This circumstance renders it difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain whether the sect still exists; … there appears to be but little known of him [Rav Das] of any authentic character”.14 And, Wilson dismisses Sena Panthis with the remark that the name of the founder [Sena] is probably all that now remains of it,15 and does not take into account Nam Dev or his followers. However, Rose has this to say, that the Namdev Panthis can scarcely be said to constitute a sect, and that the followers of Namdeo are almost entirely, if not entirely, chhimbas or dhobis by caste, as the founder himself was.16

For the purpose of the argument that we want to initiate here, we have to caution again that we have perforce to rely on the meagre data given above, as we are unable to extract any more relevant information from the accounts of other Radical Bhagti sects or sampradayas as well.

The first point that strikes is that these sampradayas or sects were, even as religious bodies, very loosely bound associations. The followers of Rav Das and Nam Deo, as seen, are hardly recognizable as a sect and are confined almost to the castes of their respective founders. Kabir “is generally looked on as having been a weaver by caste, and the weavers of the country by a process well known in eastern ethnology are fond of calling themselves the descendants of this celebrated member of their caste. Many of the Julahas in the Punjab return their caste as Kabirbansi, and many of those who return their sect as Kabirbansi or Kabir Panthi, are probably little more than ordinary weavers who have no idea of distinguishing themselves from other Hindu weavers in matters of doctrine.”17 This is not to deny the wide appeal Kabir’s hymns had even outside the circle who claimed to be his followers, but here we are concerned with Kabir Panth as an organization.

This looseness of cohesion is reflected on the doctrinal plane as well. Whereas, Allah and Ram were the same to Kabir, and he was even claimed to have been a Muslim at the time of his death, and whereas he condemned caste unequivocally, the Kabir Panthis “are always included amongst the Vaishnava sects”18, who avowedly adhere to the caste system. And what is more significant, this deviation is not acknowledged, much less condemned or checked, as a digression even at the highest level.

The second important point to be noted is that the only item having some social import that we have been able to trace is a ‘love-feast’ held sometimes by Kabir Panthis as well as by some other sects of the Radical Bhagats. As such, we give it here in detail. “A common feature of many of these sects (i.e., Bhagti-sects) is the mahaparsada or ceremonial meal. On the evening of the appointed day, the worshippers assemble and the mahant, or leading celebrant, reads a brief address, and then allows a short interval for prayer and meditation. All who feel themselves unworthy to proceed further then withdraw to a distance. Those that remain approach the senior celebrant in turn, and placing their hands together receive into the palm of the right hand, which is uppermost, a small consecrated wafer and two other articles of consecrated food. They then approach another celebrant, who pours into the palm of the right hand a few drops of water, which they drink. This food and water are regarded as Kabir’s special gift, and it is said that all who receive it worthily will have eternal life. Part of the sacramental food is ‘reserved’ and is carefully kept from pollution for administration to the sick. After the sacrament, there is a substantial meal which all attend, and which in its character closely resembles the early Christian love-feasts. It is possible that this rite was borrowed from the Jesuit missionaries at Agra, but the head-quarters of the Kabir Panthi sect are at Benaras, and the rite is now likely to be a survival of historical influences.”19

3. A Watershed
The Brahmputra and the Indus originate on opposite sides of the same watershed, but, while one takes a long course to the east, the other flows a still longer way to the west. The Radical Bhagtas and the Sikh Gurus have a number of theological doctrines in common. The Radical Bhagtas as well as the Sikh Gurus profess to follow the devotional path, i.e. the Bhagti Marg or the Nam Marg, disown Hindu scriptures and avtaras, ridicule Brahmins and Brahminism, and condemn idol-worship and caste. To Kabir, Ram and Ali are the same,20 and for Guru Nanak ‘there is no Hindu, no Muslim’. If Nam Deo calls Muslims blind, he calls the Hindus purblind.21 And yet, the Bhakti and the Sikh movements steered altogether different courses, both socially and historically. Whereas the Sikh Panth established a distinct entity of its own outside Hinduism and the caste society, the Bhagti sects have merged into Hinduism all but in name; and, beyond assailing some aspects of the caste ideology, the Bhagti sects at no stage made a serious attempt to erode the caste society. Further, whereas the Sikh movement captured political power for the downtrodden masses, the Bhagti sects never even aspired to it. This historical panorama was not, as will be seen, a fortuitous development, and it lends itself to certain important inferences.

4. Ideology and System
The caste ideology (i.e., the religious sanctification by the Hindu scriptures, Hindu dharma, the Brahminical ritualism, and the theory of pollution, etc., of the caste status of the twice-born castes) is without doubt an important pillar of the caste system, but it is not the whole of it. More than the caste ideology, it is the social organization of the caste society and its socio-religious sanctions, which made the caste system rigid and all powerful. Although Nam Deo and Kabir condemned the caste ideology vigorously, we find no evidence of anyone of the Radical Bhagtas having ever attempted seriously to tackle the social structure of the caste society in as systematic and persistent a manner as done by the Sikh Gurus. This point of divergence is very important, almost a watershed, which led to far-reaching social and historical consequences; because institutions can be replaced by institutions and systems by systems, but not by mere ideologies as such, unless these are shaped into insititutions or systems.

5. Institutionalization of Ideology
“Religion as an inner state or as a subjective experience can have no effect upon reality until it has objectified into a concrete mood, atmosphere, attitude or form. Purely personal religion cannot succeed in transcending subjectivity… Religious experience itself stimulates the development of characteristic attitudes… It is in this attitude that we find the ‘spirit’ of the religion, creating, determining, and correlating the application of the principles, ideas, norms, and rules to actual behaviour.”22 This passage would be equally appropriate if the word ‘unconcretized ideology’ is substituted for “inner state and subjective experience”. How the ‘spirit’ of the Sikh religion created, determined, and correlated the application of the principles, norms, and rules for moulding the behaviour of the Sikhs should be an interesting subject for exploration, but here we have to concentrate on those features which show how the Sikh ideology was concretized into an anti-caste institution, the Sikh Panth, outside the caste order.

According to Max Weber, Hindu religion has no ‘congregation’,23 but wherever Guru Nanak went on his missionary tours, he established local congregations of Sikhs (sangats), dharmsalas (centres for congregational worship and social activity of the Sikhs) and ‘manjis’ (centres responsible for the propagation of the mission).24 Also, the Gurus made God-orientated social service (‘sewa’) an obligatory part of congregational worship.25 In this way, steps were taken from the very beginning for the communitization and socialization of the Sikh movement.

Two further vital steps, initiated also by Guru Nanak himself, had a direct bearing on the creation and consolidation of the Sikh Panth as an anti-caste institution. People from all castes, high and low, from all walks of life, rich and poor from Hindus as well as Muslims, became Nanak Panthis.26 And, as the units from which the Sikh Panth was welded were Sikh congregations (sangats), and not castes or sub-castes, as such, the Sikh Panth was built up as an anti-caste social organization, parallel to the caste-based society at its grass-roots as well as at all other levels. Mehma Parkash records that those who observed caste distinctions kept away from Guru Angad’s congregration,27 and Bhai Gurdas writes a number of times that the Panth was created by blending the four castes and the high and low, into one.28

The second vital and effective step taken was the establishment of the institution of communal dining (‘langar’). It was not done once in a while like a ‘love-feast’, but was a regular feature of the congregational activity of the Sikhs.29 Whereas, “it is one of the constitutive principles of the castes that there should be at least ritually inviolable barriers against complete commensalism among different castes”30 Sikhs dined together at the langars attached to the dharamsalas or gurdwaras without any discrimination based on caste or creed. Guru Amardas made dining at the langar a pre-condition for all those who wanted to see him.31 This single step alone was determinative in cutting the proselytes away from the caste order, because the violation of commensal barriers was not a breach of an ordinary principle of caste, but, as noted by Weber, of a constitutive part of it. In fact, Hutton regards commensal taboos as the cornerstone of the caste organization.32 The Santhals, a very low caste in Bengal, have been known to die of hunger in times of famine rather than touch food prepared even by Brahmins.33

6. Fraternization
Institutions are a prerequisite framework for the consolidation and preservation of social changes, but the spirit that permeates their working is no less important. Common experiences, attitudes and ideals tend to draw people together. At first a parallelism of religious spontaneity may suffice, but it is the first step to a closer association of those united in their protest against the status quo and in their common desire to renew and intensify the central religious experience.34

Wach deduces, from his study of the development of the early Christian Church, of the Buddhist and the Jain Sangha, or of the Mohammaden and Zoroastrian communities, that the integration of disparate groups is brought about as a new faith creates a new world in which old concepts and institutions lose their meaning and raison d’etre. Norms are set up which define for each religion the idea of a world or society permeated by the spirit of that religion. “A new type of grouping appears which, though current throughout the history of civilization, has not always been adequately recognised. The feeling of solidarity developing in these new units is to a certain extent revolutionary. The consciousness of this solidarity will vary; and will increase and decrease with the development of the new unit. The new form of grouping is characterized by the concept of relationship of spiritual fatherhood and spiritual brotherhood. The new community will differ from the natural groups not only in the type of organization, in rites, and in beliefs, but primarily in a new spirit of unity. We have found that it is not so much organic growth which makes for the emergence of this spirit as it is a definite break with the past and with the ties of nature which characterize its rise. The more pronounced this break the more definitely we can call the new unit a specifically religious group. Symbols of the break which is consciously experienced even at the level of primitive culture are such concepts as regeneration, rebirth, conversion, and corresponding rites. Those who undergo this experience either collectively, or more frequently, individually, are stimulated to join in close company. The intimacy of the new religious experience makes for intimacy of the new fellowship. At first it may consist merely in the exchange of the new knowledge between a few; later of more followers and companions; then may grow into a lasting association, binding itself to the pursuit of a definite way of life and welding its members into a strongly knit community. ”35

The widespread institution of langar was a very important step in furthering the spirit of unity and fraternization among the Sikhs proselytized from mutually exclusive and even hostile castes. In drawing the distinction between guild and caste, Weber writes : “As a rule the fraternization of the citizenry was carried through by the fraternization of the guilds, just as the ancient polis in its innermost being rested upon the fraternization of military associations and sibs. Note that the base was ‘fraternization’… Fraternization at all times presupposes commensalism.”36

We will restrict ourselves to referring only to the non-Sikh historical sources which attest that a spirit of equality, brotherhood and fraternization prevailed amongst the Sikhs even as late as 1783 AD. Ghulam Mohyy-ud-Din, the author of Fatuhat Namah-i-Samdi (1722-23), was a contemporary of Banda. He writes that low-caste Hindus, termed khas-o-khashak-i-hamid-i-jahanmi wajud (i.e., the dregs of the society of the hellish Hindus) swelled the ranks of Banda, and everyone in his army would address the other as the adopted son of the oppressed Guru (Guru Gobind Singh) and would publicise themselves with the title of sahibzada (“Yaki rab targhib-i-digran pisar-i-khada-i-guru-i-maqhur gufta b laqub-i-shahzadgi mashur kardah”).37 A contemporary historian of Aurangzeb writes, “If a stranger knocks at their door (i.e., the door of Sikhs) at midnight and utters the name of Nanak, though he may be a thief, robber or wretch, he is considered a friend and brother, and is properly looked after.”38 Mir Ghulam Hussain Khan writes (1783 AD) about the Khalsa Panth, “When a person is once admitted into that fraternity, they make no scruple of associating with him, of whatever tribe, clan, or race he may have been hitherto; nor do they betray any of those scruples and prejudices so deeply rooted in the Hindu mind.”39 Commenting on the last part of the statement, the editor says, “This alludes to the touching or eating with persons of impure castes, in regard to which the Hindus are so tenacious.”40 The author of Haqiqat also writes about the same time that “the Sikhs were told : ‘Whoever might join you from whichever tribe, don’t have any prejudice against him and without any supersitition eat together with him.’ Now this is their custom.”41 Here we have very good independent testimony from two sources that upto 1783, at least, the Sikhs drawn from all castes dined freely with one another. Haqiqat clearly states that Khatris, Jats, carpenters, blacksmiths, and grain grocers all joined the Khalsa42 and ‘now this is their custom’.

7. Break with the Past
We have already referred to Wach’s view that the emergence of the spirit of unity and solidarity among new groups characterized by spiritual fatherhood and spiritual brotherhood is not so much an organic growth as it is a definite break with the past. This assessment is particularly correct in the Indian context where humanitarian values and liberal trends could survive only to the extent these broke away from the caste society.43 To give two illustrations : from the purely theological point of view, Jainism was no less heretic than Buddhism but, while Buddhism kept intact its heterodox identity, Jainism did not to the same extent. It was because, whereas Buddhism did not compromise with Hinduism even at the cost of having had to look for habitation outside India, Jainism was not unwilling, if the necessity arose, to admit a god of popular Hinduism, and it was also not opposed to the theory of caste.44

Another example is that of the Radical Bhagtas. Nam Dev and Kabir were much more vocal against Hinduism and caste than Baswa, but the sects of Nam Dev and Kabir were more readily absorbed into Hinduism and the caste society than the Lingayats, because Baswa had made such practical departures from the caste rules and regulations which were difficult to tone down.45

Hinduism was an almost irresistable social force : “Once established, the assimilative power of Hinduism is so great that it tends to integrate social forms considered beyond its religious borders. Thus, religious movements of expressly anti-Brahminical and anti-caste character, that is, contrary to one of the fundamentals of Hinduism, have been in all essentials returned to caste order.”46

The fact is that pre-eminence given to caste-status catered to the common human failing of status consciousness. Another fact is that the Hindu dharma (varna ashram dharma), the caste ideology, the king-pin role of the Brahmin priestly caste in upholding the caste order, and the structural framework itself of the caste society, all these blended into one another to constitute one inexorable complex. Although each of the constituents of this complex had also developed an independent propelling force of its own; but, being interlinked, these forces reinforced one another, and, acting together to serve the same purpose, they formed one formidable resultant power. Even if one, or a few, of the component strands of this complex were weakened or eliminated, its forward thrust still possessed a mighty momentum. A mere condemnation of one or another facet of the caste ideology was not enough. What was needed was to tackle all the three pillars of the caste system, i.e., the caste ideology, the Levite Brahmin caste, and the structural social framework of the caste society. There are no signs of the Radical Bhagti sects having worked persistantly to break away from both Hinduism and the caste society. What happened was inevitable; they got imperceptibly dissolved into the assimilative power of Hinduism and caste. Whatever the reasons might be, there is no running away from this consistent lesson of Indian history that the survival of humanitarian values, liberal trends, and anti-caste movements has depended almost in direct measure to the breach they made and maintained with not only the caste ideology but also with the caste society.

It is unnecessary to detail here how the Sikh Gurus demolished all the three pillars of the caste system among the Sikhs, as this subject has been dealt with in Perspectives On Sikh Studies (pp. 14-60). Sufficient to say that, if all that the Gurus rejected of Hindu ideology is taken out of Hinduism, little of substance is left as residue which Hinduism can claim as being exclusively its own. In the Census of 1881, of the total number of Brahmins only about 7000 were Sikhs.47 This figure corroborates a recognized fact that the Sikhs have no priestly class, much less a hereditary Levite class, having a vested interest in maintaining a hierarchical structure of society based on religious sanction. And of all the anti-caste movements of Indian origin, only the Buddhists and the Sikhs succeeded in establishing a separate identity from the caste society, and both did it by founding a separate church and a separate socio-religious organization (e.g., the Sikh Panth).

8. Implications
We do not mean at all to compare religious savants, as individuals, who are all great in their own ways. What we have attempted is to contrast two important movements of Indian history, which started with close theological affinity but led to divergent historical consequences, in order to indicate two important implications.
All the experts who have commented on the caste system are agreed that it is one of the most, if not the most, intractable systems of social exclusiveness and discrimination. To create the egalitarian Sikh Panth in the medieval era out of the proselytes drawn from mutually exclusive, even hostile, elements of the caste society was a Herculean task indeed. What was the propelling force which enabled the Sikh movement to work persistently, over a long period of about two centuries, for the abolition of caste against such heavy odds, but which was lacking in the medieval Radical Bhagti movement ? What made the Sikh proselytes from the twice-born castes to fraternize with the Sudras ?

The primary question to be faced by history is not of believing or not believing in prophecy. Call it prophetic mandate, inspiration, impulse, or by whatever other name one choses, what other compulsive or driving motivational urge it was, operating in one case and not in the other, that made the difference ? The greater is the obstacle to be overcome, the greater is the force that overcomes it.

Another allied implication is also important. It is true that many of the saints of the medieval Bhagti movement and the Sikh Gurus profess to follow the Nam or Bhagti Marg. But there are fundamental differences in their approaches towards such vital issues as the doctrine of ahimsa and the status of women in society.48 Within the Bhagti schools of the so-called reformation itself, there were ideological variations from one Bhagta (saint) to another. The objects of devotion of some of them (e.g., of Mirabai) were Hindu avtaras, while others rejected these avtaras and preached unalloyed monotheism. Apart from these theological distinctions, the differences in the social approach of some of these Bhagtas were real and basic. Whereas, many of the Bhagti saints suggested reforms here and there in the ideology of the caste order, but did not venture to assail its framework in unequivocal terms; Kabir challenged the very ideological basis of the caste system. Hence, it would be very misleading to regard Bhagti or Nam Marg as a uniform school of thought, practice, or experience, at least in its social manifestations. The relevance of this implication will be clear when we come to deal with the doctrine of Meeri-Peeri and its historical consequences.



1. Wach, pp. 127, 128.
2. Max Weber : The Religions of India, p. 22.
3. Ibid., pp. 23-24.
4. Ibid., p. 23.
5. Ibid., p. 29.
6. Ibid., p. 24.
7. Ibid., p. 106.
8. Ibid., p. 44.
9. Hutton, pp. 90-91.
10. Rose, H.A. : A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and N.W.F.P., Vol. ii, p. 417.
11. Wilson, H.H. : Religion, Sects of the Hindus, p. 39.
12. Ibid., p. 51.
13. Ibid., p. 54.
14. Ibid., p. 65.
15. Ibid., p. 68.
16. Rose, iii, p. 152.
17. Rose, ii, p. 417.
18. Wilson, p. 39.
20. Wilson, p. 43.
21. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 875.
22. Wach, pp. 44-45.
23. Max Weber : The Religions of India, p. 61.
24. Kirpal Singh : Janam Sakhi Prampra, Part Two, pp. 13, 44, 48, 124, 163, 169, 175, 258, 264, 268, 310;
Bhai Gurdas : Var 1, Pauri 27.
25. Ibid., pp. 116-17, 152, 161;
Bhai Gurdas : Var 3, Pauri 18; Var 9, Pauri 4; Var 14, Pauri 17; Var 18, Pauri 17; Var 28, Pauri 13;
Mehma Parkash, ii, pp. 114-17, 135-36, 159, 180, 188, 190, 283.
26. Kirpal Singh : Janam Sakhi Prampra, Part Two, pp. 106, 124, 131, 169;
Bhai Gurdas : Var 23, Pauri 19, 20; Var 24, Pauri 2; Var 29, Pauri 1.
27. Mehma Parkash, ii, p. 37.
28. Bhai Gurdas : Var 11, Pauri 7; Var 14, Pauri 2; Var 24, Pauri 4; Var 25, Pauri 14.
29. Kirpal Singh : Janam Sakhi Prampra, Part Two, pp. 19-20, 37, 96, 168, 256;
Bhai Gurdas : Var 24, Pauri 20;
Mehma Parkash, ii, pp. 15, 102, 163, 296, 319, 331, 346, 367, 566-69, 577, 787.
30. Max Weber : The Religions of India, p. 36.
31. Mehma Parkash, ii, p. 162.
32. Hutton, pp. 71, 125;
Senart, pp. 38, 39.
33. Senart, p. 39.
34. Wach, p. 179.
35. Ibid., pp. 110-11.
36. Max Weber : The Religions of India, p. 36.
37. Cited by Gurbax Singh : Punjab History Conference (December 15-16, 1973), Proceedings, pp. 55-56.
38. Sujan Rai Bhandari : Khulasat-ut-Twarikh (Trans. in Punjabi by Ranjit Singh), p. 81.
39. The Siyar-ul-Mutakherin (Trans. by John Briggs), p. 73.
40. Ibid., foot-note.
41. Haqiqat : Indian Historical Quarterly, March 1942, Sup., p. 5.
42. Ibid., p. 6.
43. The Sikh Revolution, Chapter V.
44. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan : The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. ii, pp. 425, 450;
Max Weber : The Religions of India, p. 18.
45. Tara Chand : The Influence of Islam on Indian Culture, pp. 116-120;
Max Weber : The Religions of India, pp. 19-20.
46. Max Weber : The Religions of India, pp. 18-19.
47. The Sikh Revolution, Chapter V.
48. Ibbetson, Section 412.




ęCopyright Institute of Sikh Studies, 2007, All rights reserved. Designed by Jaswant (09915861422)