News updates

Namdhari Sikhs of 1871: Martyrs of the Indic civilization

Guru Nanak campaigned for the preservation of Indic civilizational values. Sikhs upheld these values and defended Indic civilizational values and territory through numerous sacrifices during the Mughal empire. However, under British rule, the situation changed, as many Sikhs aligned with the British despite the deliberate erosion of the country's moral, social, and ethical fabric by the colonial administration.

Under the leadership of Guru Ram Singh, Namdhari Sikhs renewed their efforts to preserve Indic civilizational values, emphasizing the protection of the poor, including humans and animals. This article explores how British authorities attempted to conceal the true situation and maintain a fragile peace by suppressing public dissent.

It also uncovers lesser-known details about the Namdhari sacrifices of 1871. Additionally, it examines how deep devotion to their Guru inspired ordinary peasants and artisans to dedicate themselves to cultural and civilizational preservation-offering a lesson for those seeking spirituality, righteousness, and the values of Indic civilization.

Importance of civilizational values - Civilizational values play a crucial role in the progress of humankind, serving as the foundation for societal development and individual growth. These values, shaped by centuries of collective experience and wisdom, provide a framework for ethical behavior, social cohesion, and cultural continuity. In the context of Indic civilization, Dharma, often translated as righteous living or moral duty, is fundamentally shaped by these values, providing a framework for ethical behavior and social responsibility. These values inform religious practices, rituals, and beliefs, influencing how individuals perceive and interact with the divine and the spiritual realm. As such, civilizational values serve as a unifying force, shaping collective identity and fostering a sense of shared heritage and purpose, while simultaneously allowing for individual interpretation and expression within the broader cultural framework. Preservation of the civilizational values is thus, of utmost importance for maintenance of the ethical code for the present as well as future generations.

The advent of Guru Nanak -Among the relatively recent underpinnings of the Indic civilizational values is the reformation introduced by Guru Nanak Dev, the first Sikh Guru, about five centuries ago. The message delivered by Guru Nanak was confined not only to one's personal improvement, but was applicable for the welfare of society as a whole. One feature that distinguishes Guru Nanak's teachings from the earlier saints of Bhakti tradition is that Guru Nanak exposed the political realities of his times. He blatantly expressed the people's sufferings under tyrannous rulers. Guru Nanak stood firmly for human rights and universal brotherhood. In essence, Guru Nanak's message, with its transcendental spirituality, was equally relevant to the real-world circumstances. This has made Guru Nanak's message far more pragmatic than other contemporaries.

Guru Nanak was pained to see the degradation of Indic civilizational values during the Mughal reign, plight of the poor, cows and intellectuals, and the Hindu specifics being discriminately taxed. He explained the situation in Asa Di Var, as follows:

They tax the cows and the Brahmins, but the cow-dung they apply to their kitchen will not save them.

They wear their loin cloths, apply ritual frontal marks to their foreheads, and carry their rosaries, but they eat food with the Muslims.

O Siblings of Destiny, you perform devotional worship indoors, but read the Islamic sacred texts, and adopt the Muslim way of life.

Renounce your hypocrisy!

Taking the Naam, the Name of the Lord, you shall swim across. II1 II

Such has been the vision of Guru Nanak, that he in the 15th century envisaged that cultural freedom was equally important if India was to be freed from its subjugation.

Resurgence of puritan Sikhi during colonial British rule - In the subjugated Punjab, the cultural traditions were utterly disregarded by the new British government, yet there was practically no or very little opposition. Inferiority complex had set in the minds of people. The same inferiority complex, which was present in the society during the times of Mughal imperialism. Guru Nanak had raised the self-esteem of people then, but when his followers got 'distanced' from his philosophy, the same inferiority complex naturally set in again.

During such dark times, where the journey in tunnel did not appear to end, there was finally 'light at the end of the tunnel' soon. Within a decade of the establishment of British rule in Punjab, in 1857, Guru Ram Singh re-initiated the spark of freedom amongst the Sikhs. But before the British imperialism could be challenged, the demoralized society and the inferiority complex that had developed in because of that, had to be overcome. Thus, like Guru Nanak, spiritual and political message had to complement each other for social welfare, based on the then circumstances. Both Guru Nanak's idea and its manifestation by Guru Gobind Singh were revived in Punjab by Guru Ram Singh.  A memo on Kuka movement prepared by J.W. Macnabb in November 4, 1871 stated, 'I see in the earlier papers that (Guru) Ram Singh was looked upon as a successor or actual embodiment of Guru Nanak, the saint. He is now representative of (Guru) Govind, the warrior'.

A letter from Colonel R.G. Taylor to Secy. of Govt., Panjab dated September 11, 1868 stated Jon Newton, Missionary, as saying that the whole drift of reformation of Guru Ram Singh appears to be consolidation of the power of Sikhism with a view to political ends. The letter further states, '..it (political motives of Kuka Sikhs) was the natural result of any religious revival among a warlike race panting to recover their much loved land and to restore the glories of their Sect. (Guru) Ram Singh may have commenced as a mild religious reformer on the fashion of (Guru) Nanuk, but his stirring Lieutenants are hurrying him into a more near imitation of the warlike GoorooGobind (Singh)'.

The exemplary Sikhs - Namdhari Sikhs were the true practitioners of the Indic civilizational values. Sympathetic for the foundational elements of Indic civilization, they made special efforts to protect the cow, the basic symbol of Indian civilization and with it, the poor, which depended on cattle for its livelihood and progress.

India, although suffered under both Mughal and European colonialities for a long duration, did not leave its consciousness in entirety. Even during the times of the explicit Mughal coloniality, the subcontinent resisted attacks on its consciousness.Guru Gobind Singh Ji led an exemplary upliftment of the weak and downtrodden people, and transformed them into proud and conscious warriors. Cow was a symbol of Indic consciousness during those times also. SirdarKapur Singh mentions that according to the known scholar of early 17th century, Ahmad Sirhandi, who opposed Akbar's equity policies, 'public slaughter of cow was the highest imperative of Mughal rule in India". Indian civilization had accommodated non-Indic religions in its embrace. The idea of Indian civilization provided a safe haven to all the humanitarian mentalities that it encountered. This protection was naturally towards its own indigenous ideology of the 'supremacy of nature and its all constituents' as well. By wreckinghavoc on the 'peaceful' cow to demonstrate its hegemony, it was in fact, the Mughal coloniser which turned cow from a symbol of Hindu sacredness to that of Indian sovereignty also. Since the attack on Indian symbols was direct, there was no enigma or mystery regarding the later Mughal policy, and hence the opposition to the unjust Mughal rule through the agency of cow protection was a natural response. When the British imperialism obtained paramount control of India, it did not risk its rule by explicitly pronouncing cow slaughter, but implicitly adopted it by sugar-coating the poison with the argument of 'freedom for all religions'. This freedom, which was earlier restricted to outskirts of a town, practically got extended in the Punjab of 1870s, to the outer walls of the universally respected Sikh shrines, including Golden Temple. This was a test, not only of Indian sensitivity to the question of cow, but to the matter of Sikh faith as well.

The issue of cow protection was the umbrella, under which all aspects of Indian civilization would have been empowered. A resilient village economy on the other hand, would have resisted the capture of Indian markets by British industries. This was the basic contradiction of cow welfare with the British exploitation. The association of cow with India's cultural, political and economic sovereignty was the reason why any freedom movement of those times would have been naturally inclined to protect the symbol and pride of India from the British imperialism and its agents, irrespective of their avowed religions. Namdhari movement proudly took this cause and worked dedicatedly for it.

However, more exemplary that that is the way by which Namdhari Sikhs accomplished this task.

Reverence to Guru: another foundational feature of Indic civilization

The Guru-Shishya Parampara (teacher-disciple tradition) is an ancient and enduring system of knowledge transmission in India. Deeply embedded in the ethos of Sanatan Dharma, this tradition goes beyond conventional pedagogy, forming the very fabric of Indian civilization's spiritual, artistic, and scientific advancements. Unlike mere institutionalized learning, the Guru-Shishya relationship is an ontological and epistemological paradigm that underpins self-realization, wisdom (jnana), and the continuity of sacred and temporal knowledge.

While many civilizations have had mentor-student relationships, the Indian Guru-Shishyaparampara stands apart in its holistic and sacred dimensions. Several ancient Indian texts reinforce the Guru as a living embodiment of divine wisdom:

Mundaka Upanishad (1.2.12): "To that disciple who has approached with reverence, whose mind is tranquil, and who has mastered his senses, the wise Guru imparts that knowledge by which the imperishable Brahman is realized."

Bhagavad Gita (4.34): "Tadviddhipranipatenapariprashnenasevaya,upadekshyantitejnanamjnaninastattva-darshinah." (Approach a Guru with humility and service; they will impart transcendental knowledge as they have seen the truth.)

Skanda Purana: "Guru is Shiva without his third eye, Vishnu without his four arms, Brahma without his four heads. He is the embodiment of supreme wisdom."

Gurbani takes this to a next level. Apart from receiving wisdom from the Guru and dispelling one's ignorance, Gurbani teaches the disciple to work for the Guru unconditionally:

ਤੂਚਉਸਜਣ ਮੈਡਿਆ ਡੇਈਸਿਸੁਉਤਾਰਿ॥

If You tell me to, O my Friend, I will cut off my head and give it to You. And this is what describes the conduct of the Namdhari Sikhs.

The Punjab of 1871-Deva Singh incident – The Punjab of 1871 was going through a dangerous time, particularly the city of Amritsar. This is a classic case where official correspondence tried to hide the ground reality from the higher authorities, but which get invariable exposed when collating different sources. On 24th April, a Sikh, Dewa Singh placed a beef-bone in front of holy book of the Sikhs at Golden Temple. Dewa Singh was a follower of Bhai Veer Singh. The British officials tried to frame him that he brought the beef-bone from outside and placed it into the Sikh temple "with a view to cause disturbance" (letter of DC Amritsar dated 15th May 1871). Interestingly, the correspondence of L.H. Griffin, Officiating Secretary to the Government of Punjab to E.C. Bayley, Secretary to the Government of India says a different story and reveals that "considerable excitement prevailed in the city of Amritsar on the subject of the slaughter of kine. This excitement was to an extent hitherto unusual, and there is reason to believe owed its origin mainly to the exposure of beef for sale in the city, and to the fact of one Deva Singh, a Sikh, irritated by this exposure into the temple, picking up a bone and placing it in front of the Granth, the holy book of the Sikhs."

The British officers had tried a lot to label the disturbances as 'sporadic, isolated' events rather than a 'general wave of dissatisfaction among the public.' But the expression "irritated by exposure into the temple" informs that the defilement of Golden Temple was then a regular event due to objectional activity adjacent to it. The beef was being brought into the city in an exposed manner, and it is possible that while the initial slaughter (stunning, bleeding and skinning) of the animal was done outside the city in slaughterhouse, the same was brought in the city for making primal, sub-primal and ration cuts for distribution. During these activities of boning out cuts, the beef-bones would results, which could be picked by crows, ravens and eagles, leading to possible defilement of the sacred pool at Golden Temple. It was this 'irritation' at the exposure of beef into the temple that possibly prompted Deva Singh to do what he did in order to raise the consciousness of the temple authorities, who were meekly allowing all this to happen.

General dissent in the public -  Due to mischievous colonial government, the peace and tranquillity of Punjab was at stakes. the 'prejudices of Hindoos had often been offended' and the slaughtering of cows and sale of flesh was being done in 'careless manner' to the holy city of Amritsar, though in other reports, the officials had denied any objections or carelessness on the part of the butchers. In the same correspondence, Commissioner remarked that Hindoos were 'determined to have no stone unturned to put an end, if possible, to the slaughter of kine at Amritsar.' The Municipal Corporation of Amritsar had already cancelled the slaughter house contract for the year due to flouting of norms by the butchers and likely disturbances that were expected as a result of that. However, Commissioner convened a meeting on 22nd May and re-instated the contract, preventing an "exhibition of weakness on the part of the authorities." The feelings of the people were completely ignored. Despite the Commissioner himself noting in his correspondence that "some of the Hindoos voted against the continuance of it (the slaughterhouse contract); others refrained from voting at all", he declared that "the result of the meeting was felt by us all to be very satisfactory", thus revealing the true nature of their actions whereby the collective will of the people had no say in their proceedings. The Commissioner's declaration of success and 'everything normal' idea was again shattered when he noted that "But on the 30th May it became known to me by certain signs that the remnants of the feeling of antagonism which had been excited by the recent disturbances between the Hindoos and Mahomedans of the city still lingered in the breasts of certain classes of the former." During the festival of Nimani, Hindoos refused to buy earthen vessels (ghurahs) from Mahomedan potters. Commissioner mentioned in his correspondence that "the potters had, as usual, made preparations for supplying the wants of their Hindoo customers on this occasion: but not a Hindoo would buy of them." Similarly, Kaseras - another class of Hindoo traders, refused to buy old copper vessels from Mahomedans, as they had always been in the habit of going (earlier)." Commissioner then sent leading native men of the city, and called on them to use their influence at once to remove this remnant ill-feeling and distrust form the minds of all. The Commissioner again held a Durbar at Town Hall on 3rd June and delivered an address "carefully prepared beforehand". In this Durbar, "every man of note in the city, down to the headmen of each mohulla" were present to hear "with their own ears what the orders of Government were, and the Commissioner explained that "as long as the government was carried in the name of Maharaja Duleep Singh, our Government, out of deference to the Sikh sovereign, maintained the prohibition against the slaughter of kine, which had always existed under the Sikhs; but that, as soon as the Punjab was annexed to the British dominions, this prohibition was removed,..".

He further stated "the Government would not permit anything like rioting, even to attain a reasonable object, much less if their demands were unreasonable." This had the effect, with Commissioner remarking "I think I may say that it had a most excellent effect, many Hindoo and Mahomedan gentlemen, when the meeting broke up, embracing each other in their anxiety to show that no traces of the ill-feeling engendered by the late disturbances remained in their minds." The show of force and threat of punishment by the Government led to an outward show of embracing' by the members of the society.

No hope of the law giving redress - The 'disregard for native feelings by the British officials' and the 'hollowness of their claims of peace, law and order' are exposed by their own description of the events that happened in the city. On 1sy July 1871, Deputy Commissioner F.M. Birch wrote to the Commissioner, Amritsar Division that "on the 2nd June the order was passed in the appeal for the release of the butchers who had originally, as I thought, given the Hindoos some just ground of offence. Possibly this gave umbrage, as it precluded the hope of the law giving redress. Owing to various cause, kine-killing has been of late years very much on the increase. This doubtless hurt many respectable Hindoos, and their feelings were entirely disregarded by the parties interested in the sale of beef."The Deputy Commissioner further remarked "I took this view at first, and it led me to punish the individual butchers', but as he noted, the Commissioner himself had unjustly released the butchers on appeal and re-instating the slaughterhouse contract, which had the effect of 'precluding the hope of law giving redress'.

Just as the British administrators tried to hide the carelessness of the butchers about sensitivities related to kine and tried to wrongly frame Deva Singh as bringing a beef-bone from outside to place in Sikh temple, similarly they hid from records the presence of objectionable activity adjoining Golden Temple. It is a pity that some Sikhs historians had forwarded the line taken by the British administrators and some even continue to do so. SirdarKapur Singh mentioned his disaapointment over remarks made by Dr.Ganda Singh and Lieut Colonel Gulcharan Singh, "both of whom have declared these butchers as "law-abiding citizens" and the brave Namdhari martyrs of Malerkotla as "criminals". Same is true for Amritsar and Raikot incidents of 1871 as well. He further mentions "the perfidious Britishers made public kine-killing lawful and general in the annexed Punjab and gratuitously and devilishly established a public kine-slaughter house adjoining to the precincts of the Golden Temple which also they had annexed."

The native authorities were a puppet at the hands of the British administration. They had sided with them, and there was no hope for the general public. The Indian Statesman newpaper of 30th January, 1872 remarked "The Kookas taunted the Sikhs at Amritsar with their luke-warmness in the matter. For in truth the Sikhs there had allowed the butchers to establish themselves just outside the walls of the city of the Fountain of Immortality. In June last year an attack was made on this establishment." It is worth-mentioning here that the initial slaughterhouse was established in 1849 after consultation of C.B. Saunders with RaiTukht Mull and other Hindoo punches of the city. Defeated in the second Anglo-Sikh war of 1849, the Sikhs had now no say in the affairs of the city. So what was it for which the 'Kookas taunted the Sikhs at Amritsar' and what was 'this establishment' where an attack was made by the Kookas? There was no point in 'Kookas taunting the Sikhs there' for a slaughterhouse that was constructed in 1849 and in which the Sikhs had no say at all. The expression 'this establishment' indicates a different one and the whole statement indicates a new development that raised tension in the city, as above. It was the new objection that had sprung up adjacent to Golden Temple and the tall Gothic-style Clock Tower being erected in front of Golden Temple to signify the new times dominated by British colonizers. The Clock Tower was being constructed by Kashmiri Muslims and they were stated as being responsible for the recent disturbances that had happened in the city, with one British report differentiating them from the Punjab Muslims [On 15th May, DC, Amritsar reported that 'the feeling of dislike is felt more towards them (Kashmeerees) than towards the Panjabee Mahomedans]. Viewing in combination with the 'Deva Singh incident', it clearly implicates objectionable kine activity adjacent to Golden Temple, supporting the statement of SirdarKapur Singh later as 'a public kine-slaughter house adjoining to the precincts of the Golden Temple which also they had annexed'. It may not have been a full abattoir (which was outside the city), but more akin to a butcher facility where final cuts were made and boning done. The Commissioner reported the "very rapid increase" in consumption of beef in the city, "want of care on the part of butchers and others engaged in the trade in the sale and distribution of it". The report further mentioned that "the war between France and Prussia has thrown thousands of Cashmeeries out of employ" and these "poorer classes of the Mahomedan population of the town look for a cheap and at the same time satisfying description of food; and they have found it in beef, which is now even selling for a third of the price of mutton and goat's flesh." It further reported that due to drought of many years, and "the difficulty of obtaining fodder during this period has compelled the owners of horned cattle to part with these animals for a mere trifle." Additionally, it said "consumption of beef has been further stimulated by the slaughter-house contractors for their own profit; and doubtless the knowledge that they hold a Government monopoly has emboldened them and rendered them careless of the manner in which the flesh was brought into the town; and this the prejudices of Hindoos have often been offended."

Concluding this in the classical Punjab school administrationstyle, the Commissioner made a U-turn and remarked "there has, however, never been any open infringement of the rules originally laid for the slaughter of kine and sale of the flesh, and on this ground the Hindoos had no cause of complaint." Disregarding the aspects of his own report, he went on to give a clean chit to butchers to influence the opinion of his higher authorities and hide his mistakes which later Deputy Commissioner Birch pointed out in his letter dated 1" July 1871, stating that the mischievous butchers convicted by DC were acquitted by Commissioner precluding the "hope of the law giving redress."

However, the authorities were able to contain the feelings of the general public through use of 'excessive force'. DC Amritsar's letter dated 15th May 1871 expressed satisfaction that "Today's fair, held close by the slaughter-house, has passed without accident, though extra police arrangements were made" and the fact that the disorderly conduct of the Hindoos "does not entitle them to any extra considerations", even though it is they who have been at the receiving end.

The reaction of Namdhari Sikhs- Namdhari Sikhs were fully alive to the cause of cow. There were economic, psychological and religious stakes with this issue. The British needed beef for their army. Quoting from 'Did British instigate Muslims on cow slaughter?' written by SaquibSalim in Awaz journal, 'Barrister Pandit Bishan Narayan Dar, in his 'Appeal to the English Public on behalf of the Hindus of N.W.P and Oudh' (1893) after Hindus and Muslims clashed over cow-sacrifice wrote that the Hindu Muslim tensions are nothing but a part of divide and rule policy of the British. He pointed out that before the British rule Hindus and Muslims never fought over cow sacrifice. The British in order to fulfill their own need of beef for the army encouraged the Muslim butchers to slaughter cows. Muslims akin to a butcher facility where final cuts were made and boning done. The Commissioner reported the "very rapid increase" in consumption of beef in the city, "want of care on the part of butchers and others engaged in the trade in the sale and distribution of it". The report further mentioned that "the war between France and Prussia has thrown thousands of Cashmeeries out of employ" and these "poorer classes of the Mahomedan population of the town look for a cheap and at the same time satisfying description of food; and they have found it in beef, which is now even selling for a third of the price of mutton and goat's flesh." It further reported that due to drought of many years, and "the difficulty of obtaining fodder during this period has compelled the owners of horned cattle to part with these animals for a mere trifle." Additionally, it said "consumption of beef has been further stimulated by the slaughter-house contractors for their own profit; and doubtless the knowledge that they hold a Government monopoly has emboldened them and rendered them careless of the manner in which the flesh was brought into the town; and this the prejudices of Hindoos have often been offended."

Concluding this in the classical Punjab school administration style, the Commissioner made a U-turn and remarked "there has, however, never been any open infringement of the rules originally laid for the slaughter of kine and sale of the flesh, and on this ground the Hindoos had no cause of complaint." Disregarding the aspects of his own report, he went on to give a clean chit to butchers to influence the opinion of his higher authorities and hide his mistakes which later Deputy Commissioner Birch pointed out in his letter dated 1" July 1871, stating that the mischievous butchers convicted by DC were acquitted by Commissioner precluding the "hope of the law giving redress."

However, the authorities were able to contain the feelings of the general public through use of 'excessive force'. DC Amritsar's letter dated 15th May 1871 expressed satisfaction that "Today's fair, held close by the slaughter-house, has passed without accident, though extra police arrangements were made" and the fact that the disorderly conduct of the Hindoos "does not entitle them to any extra considerations", even though it is they who have been at the receiving end.

The reaction of Namdhari Sikhs-Namdhari - Sikhs were fully alive to the cause of cow. There were economic, psychological and religious stakes with this issue. The British needed beef for their army. Quoting from 'Did British instigate Muslims on cow slaughter?' written by SaquibSalim in Awaz journal, 'Barrister Pandit Bishan Narayan Dar, in his 'Appeal to the English Public on behalf of the Hindus of N.W.P and Oudh' (1893) after Hindus and Muslims clashed over cow-sacrifice wrote that the Hindu Muslim tensions are nothing but a part of divide and rule policy of the British. He pointed out that before the British rule Hindus and Muslims never fought over cow sacrifice. The British in order to fulfill their own need of beef for the army encouraged the Muslim butchers to slaughter cows. Muslims did not kill cows for their own purpose but the British were encouraging the poor Muslims to have beef!

A symbol of sacredness and sovereignty, cow was also a facilitator of the Indian village economy. The British primarily came to India for economic exploitation. The Hindu-Muslim, Hindu-Sikh divide was a means to achieve that end. The British model of India as a 'source of raw material and market of industrial products' would not have worked, if India would have been economically strong internally owing to a resilient village economy. Cow, as the originator of bulls and ox, provided intensification of farming activities. It also provided nourishment in the form of milk. During the times of drought, it served as the only 'insurance of the poor' and enabled him and his family to continue till the next monsoons. Slaughter of cow increased its prices and decreased its affordability for the poor. A number of small peasants became landless. Rural economic independence was ruined. The peasants were not only landless or under unprecedented debts, but now were the forced consumers of British goods and dependent on its system. Hence, the slaughter of cow was actually the destruction of village economy, weakening of its intrinsic supply chain, resulting in absolute dependence of the colonised people on the coloniser.

The place of cow in the eyes of British imperialism was as a resource to be 'exploited', in contrast to the indigenous view of cow as a resource to be 'sustainably utilized'. In fact, the Britishers banned cowslaughter either whenever they thought the native rule was powerful or during some years of World War II, when India turned from a forced consumer of goods to forced provider of supplies for the war effort.

Sermon of Satguru Ram Singh regarding defilement of Golden Temple -  Satguru Ram Singh had started a movement of resurgence of Sikhi. Under this, many people turned to puritan form of Sikhi and embraced the ideology that had yielded exemplary sacrifices earlier. In his letter dated 24th July 1871, L. Cowan, Deputy Commissioner of Ludhiana remarked that Satguru Ram Singh in one of his sermons "went on to allude to the defilement of the holy place at Umritsar by the presence of slaughterers of cows", to which several of his followers cried out "If you order it, we will kill the butchers". (Guru) Ram Singh replied "Don't do anything in a hurry: the time has not yet come." The Sikhs, already anguished at the events in Amritsar, now looked for a signal from the Guru to kill the butchers and sacrifice for the sake of religion. Gulab Singh, an old man, met various Kuka Sikhs at Amritsar. An enthusiastic man, he indicated to other Sikhs that Satguru's orders for killing the butchers have been received. The atmosphere around that time was already tense in Amritsar, and the higher British authorities were allying with the butchers and calming the general public with brute force persuasion. More than ten Sikhs decided to attack the butcher-house. Three attempts could not materialize, but the fourth on 15th June 1871 was successful.

No trace in Amritsar incident- The Namdhari Sikhs did not leave any trace at Amritsar, and completely deceived the British intelligence authorities, so much so that Secretary to Government of Punjab remarked in his letter dated 22nd July 1871, when other Namdhari Sikhs were arrested for Raikot incident that "the Sikhs naturally would fix the crime on the obnoxious sect of Kukas, and there is as yet no certainty that the right persons have been arrested." The Sikhs placed a blue cloth around a chakar, which directed the enquiry proceedings towards Nihungs. The Namdhari Sikhs spread out in different places. In about 2-3 weeks, police completely devoid of any clue, arrested innocent people to save its face. The Nihungs and Hindoos who had participated in earlier protest but had nothing to do at all with the butcher killing were beaten mercilessly and convicted by brute force. Another slaughter-house was present in Raikot. There, the people, even the Muslims were highly annoyed by the actions of the butchers and there was "complaint of the Municipal Committee and the Mahomedan Lumberdars of Raikot that he (Boota, butcher) defiled the water lying near his dwelling by throwing into it the bones of the slaughtered animals." Gulab Singh along with other Sikhs of that area attack the Raikot slaughterhouse on 15th July 1871.

Innocents arrested by Police to avoid embarrasement-  Some Sikhs of the Amritsar incident were in Sri Bhaini Sahib when the father of Satguru Ram Singh, Baba Jassa Singh, remarked that it is wrong if innocent people have to bear the wrath of the Government, for an act which they did not do. The good work of saving the cows will go in vain if innocent people are killed in lieu of it. Satguru Ram Singh directed the people present in that meeting to go and inform the administration of their act and get the innocent people acquitted. In the statement given to Colonel Baillie, Lehna Singh informed that "a Singh arrived from Bhainee to Jhunda Singh and Mehr Singh, enjoining then not to reveal that Goolab Singh had been arrested, and it was the Gooroo's order." Gulab Singh participated in both the incidents, Amritsar and Raikot. Till that time, the Namdhari Sikhs who had participated in Raikot incident had also been arrested from Patiala territory. Cowan reported on 24th July that "Dull Singh, has turned approver on an offer of pardon. He came out somewhat reluctantly with details, but his wife, an intelligent woman, in order to save her husband, has given a clear account of the affair. The links between Amritsar and Raikot incidents were highlighted. Gulab Singh was made an approver DC Ludhiana L. Cowan was bent upon collecting evidence against Satguru Ram Singh. Three persons namely Dal Singh, Kahn Singh and Gulab Singh were not given death sentences. As noted earlier, Dal Singh gave information reluctantly. All three could have been used by the British authorities to frame Satguru Ram Singh. In his letter to Commissioner, Amritsar Division dated 5th August 1871, L. Cowan, DC Ludhiana stated that 'the neck of Kookaism is broken. Secessions are of hourly occurrence...(Guru) Ram Singh is distrusted. The Kookas believe that, fearing evil consequences to himself, he gave false evidence at the trial, where by the accused were prejudiced." Interesting, Cowan states that "This is an incorrect belief, but it is well to encourage it."

Did the Queen's evidences misdirect the British authorities? -  Hell-bent on somehow framing Satguru Ram Singh, the three persons Dal Singh, Kahn Singh and Gulab Singh who had turned Queen's evidences could have been the tool. Based on the British report prepared by J.W. Macnabb dated 4th November 1871 and the contemporary Namdhari literature written by BhaiSantokh Singh, one interesting event happened. Dal Singh confirmed that "When starting Bhagwan Singh got Rs. 12 from Gopal Singh for expenses, which was made over to Gulab Singh. That they had this Rs. 12 is confirmed by Dal Singh. They then started and, after getting Gyani Singh's assistance in swords, Dal Singh and men, committed the murder." As per the Namdhari sources, Gopal Singh, incharge of the shop at Sri Bhaini Sahib, was approached by the British authorities to testify if he had given Rs 12 as claimed by Queen's evidences. Gopal Singh said had he given any money, it would have been entered in the account book. The account book was called for and nothing was found in it related to Rs. 12. Thus, the credibility of the Queen's evidences came into question and despite the Cowan's statement that 'the neck of Kookaism is broken' and that 'Guru Ram Singh is distrusted' did not result in them finding even a single Namdhari Sikh, including the Queen's evidences for a testimony against Satguru Ram Singh. J.W. Macnabbreported that the evidences collected were a "presumption sufficiently strong when taken with the above direct evidence, to be accepted as a fact", meaning that evidence was strong to show Guru Ram Singh's involvement in these incidents. However, in the very next line, Macnabb laments, "It is, of course, impossible to predict the result of confronting the witnesses, who are all Kukas, with their Guru, also as to how far cross-examination may show them to be lying...". The fact that despite the statements of the Queen's evidences, the British authorities did not proceed with the judicial trail fearing a "failure" and the statement 'how far cross-examination mat show them (Queen's evidences) to be lying' point to a possibility where the Queen's evidences Dal Singh, Kahn Singh and Gulab Singh may had actually "misdirected" the investigation, thereby subtly communicating the inability of a successful judicial trial by the British authorities. More relevant information was furnished by other Namdhari Sikhs like Ganda Singh, Lehna Singh than those who had turned Queen's evidences. Namdhari sources cite that the Sikhs were eager to sacrifice their lives earlier than others in the pursuit of Dharma. Mustan Singh who had participated in the Raikot incident got the information that Dal Singh had turned Queen's evidence and that he and others should flee. However, by that time, the false framing of innocent people in Amritsar was widely known, not only to Namdhari Sikhs but to general public as well, as noted in Cowan's statement dated 24th July 1871 where he stated that "there is all over the country a feeling of irritation among the Khutrees and Sahookars at the unnecessary arrest in Umritsar of many respectable persons."

Cases suddenly turn "cake-walk" for Police- In the statement given to Colonel Baillie, Lehna Singh informed that "a Singh arrived from Bhainee to Jhunda Singh and Mehr Singh, enjoining then not to reveal that Goolab Singh had been arrested, and it was the Gooroo's order." This corroborates with the Namdhari narrative that some of the persons involved in Amritsar incident had surrendered by the instructions of Satguru Ram Singh, and that this thing became known in Namdharisangat soon. The proceedings of the case concerning the Raikot incident took place very fast as noted by DC where he stated, "Not a single person has been unnecessarily arrested. Much useless irritation to the people has thus been avoided." Inspector General of Police, Punjab Lieutenant-Colonel G. McAndrew noted in his letter dated 11th November 1871 that "Raikot murder was investigated in those localities where Kukas are most numerous and influential." Given the fact that in the important city of Amritsar, where only about 8-10 homes were of Namdhari Sikhs and where after the incident, the British authorities could not track even a single Namdhari Sikh despite intense investigation by the Police, how come that in Raikot, where as noted by McAndrew that 'Kukas are most numerous and influential", "so complete was the case against the accused, that Mr. Cowan, Deputy Commissioner of Ludhiana, was only obliged to stay a day and a half on the spot to commit the prisoners to the Sessions, and the Sessions Judge was able to conduct the trial in a similarly short time"? "In the Bassian trial the Police case was self-contained. No witness was summoned either by the committing Magistrate or the Sessions Judge. The various clues were placed before the Courts in a connected manner, so that little remained for the Judge beyonf recording them and drawing correct conclusions form the evidence." As explained earlier, by this time, Satguru Ram Singh had asked a few persons involved in the Amritsar case to report their act to the authorities and thereby obtain freedom of the innocent people convicted falsely by the administration. Namdhari literature informs that Mustan Singh could have fled to avoid arrest, but remained at his place to prevent similar treatment to innocent people there as had happened in Amritsar. When approached by the authorities and implicated by Dal Singh (Queen's evidence), Mustan Singh denied being a part of the act to let the system find on its own. Deputy Commissioner L. Cowan wanted to somehow implicate Satguru Ram Singh in this case. The participants of the Raikot incident Mustan Singh, Mangal Singh and Gurmukh Singh were lined up and asked how they came to Dal Singh's house. They remarked that while returning from Sri Bhaini Sahib, they visited Dal Singh. The authorities remarked that if their story comes out to be false, they would be hanged. This was a plot to accuse Satguru Ram Singh of helping the Sikhs in the incident. Dal Singh had already given particulars of the whole incident, hence there was no point in denying anymore. When Satguru Ram Singh was asked if he recognizes Mustan Singh, Mangal Singh and Gurmukh Singh, he said that he recognizes all of them, but cannot remark if they visited Sri Bhaini Sahib during the fair or not. Based on evidence of Dal Singh, all three were hanged and Gulab Singh was spared, turned to Queen's evidence to show that he had solved the Amritsar case. However, as per Namdhari literature, Fateh Singh, Beela Singh, Hakim Singh and others had already presented themselves before the authorities earlier. It is interesting to note that in the official files, the case thereafter feels like "cake-walk".

All statements matched perfectly, everyone was traced easily! - Persons who could not be traced in the Amritsar case since more than one-and-a-half month and who could have easily fled given the arrests and hanging of Sikhs in the Raikot incident, were very easily traced form Amritsar itself after Gulab Singh arrives there on 2nd August 1871. And the statements of every Sikh matched with everyone else, as noted by Lepel Griffin, Secretary to Government of Punjab, "confirming in every particular the story told by Goolab Singh." This casts doubt on the official reports. No body differed or had even a slightly different variation of the events. How was this possible? Gulab Singh agreed that he was the principal in all the four attempts planned on the Amritsar butcher-house. Everyone, Gulab Singh, Beela Singh and then Lehna Singh took the police to the sites in village of Kowlanwala and others, where they had hid the swords after the attack, though all had agreed to every detail told by Gulab Singh and accepted their share in the incident at the very first instance, leading Secretary to remark "By degrees every particular of the Kooka conspiracy for the murder of the Amritsar butchers was elicited from Goolab Singh and such of his accomplices as admitted their share in the outrage." What a dream case it turned out for the Police! The dramatic turn of events after literally complete failure of Police since a month imply that given the orders of Satguru Ram Singh, Sikhs admitted their share in the Raikot incident without fleeing, and in the case of Amritsar incident, themselves surrendering to the authorities with concerted action, single story and no remorse. He Progress report of enquiry in Umritsar Butcher Outrage, No. X, dated 7th August 1871 stated about Beela Singh, a participant of the Amritsar incident that immediately on the arrival of Gulab Singh, "admitted his own share in the murderous attack on butchers at Umritsar on 15th June, but professed his entire ignorance of any of the others who were engaged with him in the affair. Beela Singh is a SadhKookah, of no fixed place of residence: he appears actuated by strong fanatical zeal, and to be indifferent to his own fate." How come that a saint with "no fixed place of residence" was arrested on the information given by Gulab Singh? If not for self-surrender, the saint could have easily wandered around and escaped arrest. Further, the report stated "Beela Singh has now named all the parties engaged with him in the crime: his statement entirely agrees with that of Goolab Singh." Namdhari literature mentions that Satguru Ram Singh had asked other participants of the Amritsar incident, namely Mehr Singh, Jhunda Singh and Bhagwan Singh to leave, possibly since the others namely Fateh Singh, Hakim Singh, Lehna Singh, Beela Singh had settled the case and obtained the freedom of the innocent people. Jhunda Singh was arrested in 1873 and hanged, while Mehr Singh and Bhagwan Singh could never be traced. Interestingly, Mehr Singh changed his name to Sant Singh and remained in Sri Bhaini Sahib itself. Hence, had the Namdhari Sikhs intended to flee and escape punishment, the participants of both the Amritsar case and the Raikot case could have done so. Meanwhile, an attempt on Shimla slaughter-house was planned and an attempt on Machhiwara slaughter-house was demanded by Sikhs from Satguru Ram Singh, but was denied for that time being. It is possible that, had the British authorities not resorted to the unethical conduct of convicting innocent people, and had the participants of the Amritsar and Raikot incidents not been Namdhari Sikhs, they would have escaped investigation and either attempted more such attacks or continued to live their lives in moral satisfaction thereafter. However, the protection of the 'cow' was the protection of a symbol of Indian civilization, which represented not just cattle but also the poor. This is why to protect the innocent people convicted by the British administration, they surrendered, even though it meant that the whole community once again came under strict watch and persecution. Further, they exemplify a lifestyle ideal informed by Gurbani:

ਤੂ ਚਉ ਸਜਣ ਮੈਡਿਆ ਡੇਈ ਸਿਸੁ ਉਤਾਰਿ ॥

If You tell me to, O my Friend, I will cut off my head and give it to You.

Satguru Ram Singh had not given direct orders to anyone to go and risk their lives for the sake of a cause, which although was dear to all, was in no way connected or related to Namdhari Sikhs alone. Protection of cow was an economic and religious issue for everyone. Still Namdhari Sikhs, responding to the general will of their Guru, sacrificed themselves for a public cause. The British authorities used threats to force a peace, which had no foundation and depended only on continuous indignation on the part of Hindoos, Sikhs and well-disposed Muslims for its continuance. Namdhari Sikhs took the step as a last resort, when it was clear to all that the British and the British-sponsored elements would not mend their ways. This theme recurred in Indian freedom struggle thereon, with Bhagat Singh having to resort to special efforts to make the "deaf ears of Government hear the plight of the people."

Conclusion - The Gazetteer of Ludhiana district stated in 1904 that 'it is not possible for a Kuka to be a loyal subject of the British Government'. The Namdhari Sikh movement of 1871 exemplifies the deep-rooted values of Indian civilization, particularly in their reverence for the cow and their commitment to protecting the poor. In response to the British colonial administration's disregard for native sensitivities, Namdhari Sikhs took bold action against cow slaughter near sacred sites like the Golden Temple in Amritsar. Their actions were not merely impulsive reactions but deliberate choices aligned with their Guru's teachings and their understanding of dharma.

The movement was sparked by the British administration's policies that allowed cow slaughter near sacred sites, which was seen as a direct attack on Indian cultural and religious values. The Namdhari Sikhs, led by Satguru Ram Singh, saw the protection of cows as more than just a religious duty; it was a stand against British economic exploitation and a defense of Indian civilization. By protecting cows, they were also safeguarding the village economy, which depended heavily on cattle, and the livelihoods of poor farmers who relied on cows for sustenance.

What truly sets the Namdhari martyrs apart is their unwavering devotion to their Guru and their willingness to sacrifice themselves for their beliefs. When innocent people were wrongly implicated in the Amritsar incident, Satguru Ram Singh instructed some of the actual participants to surrender themselves. This directive showcases the Guru's commitment to truth and justice, and the disciples' unwavering obedience to their Guru's will. The Namdhari Sikhs who had participated in the incidents willingly came forward, provided consistent accounts, and accepted punishment without remorse.

The actions of the Namdhari martyrs embody core features of Indian civilization, such as the Guru-Shishya Parampara (teacher-disciple tradition), dharma (righteous living), and the concept of sacrifice for the greater good. Their reverence for the cow as a symbol of Indian sovereignty and their efforts to protect it reflect the deep-rooted respect for nature and all its constituents in Indian thought. Moreover, their selfless acts of self-surrender to save innocent people demonstrate the Indian ideal of 'Vasudhaiva-Kutumbakam' (the world is one family) and the willingness to sacrifice oneself for the welfare of others.

In conclusion, the Namdhari martyrs truly represented Indian civilization through their actions. Their unwavering commitment to protecting cultural and religious values, their reverence for their Guru, their selfless sacrifice, and their dedication to truth and justice all embody the highest ideals of Indian civilization. These martyrs stood not just for the protection of cows, but for the preservation of a way of life, an economic system, and a set of values that were under threat from colonial rule. Their actions and sacrifices continue to inspire and serve as a powerful testament to the enduring values of Indian civilization, making them true martyrs of the Indic civilization.

Dr. Alla Singh Paneser

Namdhari Writer

99718-46875

'ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ' ਅਤੇ 'ਨਮਾਜ਼'

 ਹਰ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਸਿਰਜਣਹਾਰੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਪੈਰੋਕਾਰਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਜਾਂ ਉਸ 'ਅਦਿੱਖ ਸ਼ਕਤੀ' ਨਾਲ ਜੋੜਣ ਜਾਂ ਉਸ ਦਾ ਸ਼ੁਕਰਨਾ ਕਰਨ ਲਈ ਕੁਝ ਨਿਯਮ ਜਾਂ ਨੁਕਤੇ ਤਹਿ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ। ਜਿਸ ਦੇ ਫਲਸਰੂਪ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਪੈਰੋਕਾਰ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਨਿਯਮਾਂ ਦੀ ਪਾਲਣਾ ਕਰਦੇ ਹੋਏ ਆਪਣੇ ਸੰਸਾਰਿਕ ਅਤੇ ਅਧਿਆਤਮਿਕ ਜੀਵਨ ਦਾ ਰਾਹ ਸੁਖਾਲਾ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ।ਧਰਮ ਅਧੀਨ ਹੀ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਨਿਯਮਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਨਿਤਨੇਮ ਬਣਾ ਲਿਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਇਹ ਨਿਯਮ ਆਤਮਿਕ ਸੁੱਖ ਦਾ ਸਾਧਨ ਹੋ ਨਿਬੜਦੇ ਹਨ। ਹਰ ਇੱਕ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਨਿਯਮ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਢੰਗ ਨਾਲ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਪਾਲਣਾ ਕੀਤੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ। ਜੇਕਰ ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦੀ ਗੱਲ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਨੂੰ ਯਾਦ ਕਰਨ ਦੇ ਢੰਗ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਹਨ ਪਰ ਦੋਵਾਂ ਧਰਮਾਂ ਦਾ ਵਿਸ਼ਵਾਸ਼ ਇੱਕ ਰੱਬ ਭਾਵ 'ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ' ਜਾਂ 'ਅਲੱਹ' ਵਿੱਚ ਹੈ। ਇਸੇ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਨਿੱਤਨੇਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਪੰਜ ਨਮਾਜਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਪੰਜ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਹੈ।

ਜੇਕਰ ਅਸੀਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦੀ ਗੱਲ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪਰਸ਼ੀਅਨ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਸ਼ਾਬਦਿਕ ਅਰਥ ਹੈ 'ਸ਼ਰਧਾ'। ਪਰ ਜੋ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਮੂਲ ਰੂਪ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਵਿੱਚ ਦਰਜ਼ ਹੈ ਉਹ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਹੈ 'ਸਲਾਤ'। ਅਰਬੀ ਭਾਸ਼ਾ ਵਿੱਚ 'ਸਲਾਤ' ਦਾ ਸ਼ਾਬਦਿਕ ਅਰਥ ਹੈ, ਅਰਦਾਸ।

ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦੇ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ 622 ਈ: ਵਾਲੇ ਸਾਲ ਪੈਗੰਬਰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੂੰ 'ਇਸਰਾ ਅਤੇ ਮਿਰਾਜ' ਦੇ ਦਿਨ (ਜੰਨਤ ਵੱਲ ਯਾਤਰਾ ਵਾਲਾ ਦਿਨ) ਅੱਲ੍ਹਾ ਕੋਲੋਂ ਪੰਜ  ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ (ਸਲਾਤ) ਦੀ ਬਖਸ਼ਿਸ਼ ਹੋਈ ਸੀ। ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਪੰਜ ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ ਦਾ ਨਿਤਨੇਮ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਹੋਇਆ ਅਤੇ ਇਹ ਪੰਜ ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੀ ਜਰੂਰੀ ਸ਼ਰਤ ਹੋ ਗਈਆਂ। ਅਰਬ ਦੇਸ਼ਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਅੱਜ ਵੀ 'ਨਮਾਜ਼' ਨੂੰ 'ਸਲਾਤ' ਹੀ ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਚਾਰ ਅਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਰ ਨਾਲ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਸਿਧਾਂਤ ਅਤੇ ਨਿਯਮ ਹੋਰਨਾਂ ਦੇਸ਼ਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਖੇਤਰਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਪਹੁੰਚੇ।

ਇਤਿਹਾਸਕਾਰਾਂ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ 712 ਈ. ਵਿੱਚ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਕਾਸਿਮ ਪਹਿਲੇ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਹਮਲਾਵਰ ਦੇ ਰੂਪ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਨੂੰ ਨਾਲ ਲੈ ਭਾਰਤ ਪਹੁੰਚਿਆ, ਪਰ ਅਜੋਕੀਆਂ ਇਤਿਹਾਸਿਕ ਖੋਜਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਹ ਨਿਸਚਿਤ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਕਾਸਿਮ ਤੋਂ ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਵੀ ਕਈ ਅਰਬ ਦੇ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਵਪਾਰੀ ਭਾਰਤ ਆਉਂਦੇ ਰਹੇ, ਜਿਸ ਦੀ ਉਦਹਾਰਨ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਦੇ ਸਮਕਾਲ ਹੀ 629 ਈ. ਵਿੱਚ ਕੇਰਲਾ (ਭਾਰਤ) ਵਿੱਚ ਬਣੀ 'ਚੇਰਾਮਨ ਜੁੰਮਾ ਮਸਜਿਦ' ਹੈ। ਪਰ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਵਪਾਰੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਧਰਮ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਆਪਣੀ ਨਿੱਜੀ ਜਿੰਦਗੀ ਤੱਕ ਹੀ ਸੀਮਿਤ ਸੀ, ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਮਕਸਦ ਧਰਮ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਚਾਰ ਕਰਨਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਸਗੋਂ ਆਪਣੇ ਹਿੱਸੇ ਆਏ ਰੋਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਕਰਤੱਵਾਂ ਦਾ ਪਾਲਣ ਕਰਨਾ ਸੀ।

ਮੱਧ ਕਾਲ ਵਿੱਚ ਅਸੀਂ ਵੇਖਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਕਿ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਰ ਦੀ ਲੋੜ ਵਿਦੇਸ਼ੀ ਹਮਲਾਵਰਾਂ ਨੇ ਜਿੱਤੇ ਹੋਏ ਗੈਰ ਇਸਲਾਮਿਕ ਖੇਤਰਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਜਿਆਦਾ ਮਹਿਸੂਸ ਕੀਤੀ ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਉਹ ਜਾਣਦੇ ਸਨ ਕਿ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਪੈਰੋਕਾਰ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਸੱਤਾ ਦੀ ਹਾਮੀ ਭਰਨ ਲਈ ਬਹੁਤ ਹੀ ਫਾਇਦੇਮੰਦ ਸਨ ਅਤੇ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਬਗਾਵਤਾਂ ਦਾ ਅੰਤ ਇਹੀ ਸੀ ਕਿ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਰਮ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਚਾਰਿਆ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਰਿਆ ਜਾਵੇ। ਜਿੰਨੇ ਜਿਆਦਾ ਲੋਕ ਬਾਦਸ਼ਾਹ ਦੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਹੋਣਗੇ ਉਨਾਂ ਹੀ ਬਗਵਤਾਂ ਦਾ ਡਰ ਘਟੇਗਾ, ਹਾਂ ਕੁਝ ਕੱਟੜ ਬਾਦਸ਼ਾਹ ਦਾਰ ਉਲ ਹਰਬ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਦਾਰ-ਉਲ-ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦੀ ਸਥਾਪਤੀ ਦੇ ਸਿਧਾਂਤ ਨੂੰ ਮੁੱਖ ਮੰਨ ਕੇ ਇਸਲਾਮਿਕ ਕਬਜੇ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣਾ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਕਰਤੱਵ ਵੀ ਸਮਝਦੇ ਰਹੇ। ਮੱਧਕਾਲ ਸਮੇਂ ਹਾਕਮਾਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਜਬਰਦਸਤੀ ਜਾਂ ਇਨਾਮਾਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਪਰਜਾ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਰਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਕਰਨਾ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਪਹਿਲਕਦਮੀ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ਪਰ ਸ਼ੁਰੂਆਤੀ ਹਮਲਾਵਰਾਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਇਨਾਮਾਂ ਜਾਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦੀਆਂ ਸਿੱਖਿਆਵਾਂ ਰਾਹੀਂ ਲੋਕਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ, ਔਰੰਗਜ਼ੇਬ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਜਬਰੀ ਧਰਮ ਕਬੂਲ ਕਰਵਾਉਣ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਚਲਣ ਵੀ ਰਿਹਾ ਪਰ ਇਹ ਸਿਰਫ ਸਮਾਜ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਕਾਰੀ ਵਿਅਕਤੀਆਂ ਉੱਪਰ ਹੀ ਲਾਗੂ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਸੀ ਤਾਂ ਜੋ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਸ਼ਾਲੀ ਵਿਅਕਤੀਆਂ ਦੇ ਨਾਲ ਹੀ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਅਧੀਨ ਆਉਂਦੇ ਲੋਕਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਸੁਭਾਵਿਕ ਹੀ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਰਮ ਨਾਲ ਜੋੜ ਲਿਆ ਜਾਵੇ।

ਭਾਰਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦਾ ਪਹਿਲਾ ਵੱਡਾ ਪਸਾਰਾ ਉਮੈਦ ਵੰਸ਼ ਦੇ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਕਾਸਿਮ ਦੇ ਸਿੰਧ ਉੱਪਰ ਹਮਲੇ (712 ਈ.) ਨਾਲ ਹੋਇਆ। ਉਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਇਹ ਸਿਲਸਿਲਾ ਮਹਿਮੂਦ ਗਜ਼ਨਵੀ ਅਤੇ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਗੌਰੀ ਦੇ ਭਾਰਤ ਉੱਪਰ 9ਵੀਂ 10ਵੀਂ ਸਦੀ ਦੇ ਹਮਲਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਹੋਰ ਜਿਆਦਾ ਤੇਜ਼ ਹੋਇਆ ਅਤੇ ਮੁਗਲਾਂ ਦੇ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਸੱਤਾ ਵਿੱਚ ਆ ਜਾਣ ਤੱਕ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਧਰਮ ਦਾ ਪਸਾਰਾ ਕਾਫੀ ਜਿਆਦਾ ਹੋ ਚੁੱਕਾ ਸੀ। 1535 ਈ. ਤੱਕ ਭਾਰਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਗਿਣਤੀ 12.8 ਮਿਲੀਅਨ ਸੀ। ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦੀ ਸ਼ੁਰੂਆਤ (15 ਵੀਂ ਸਦੀ) ਤੱਕ ਲੱਗਭਗ 700 ਸਾਲਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਧਰਮ ਭਾਰਤੀ ਸੰਸਕ੍ਰਿਤੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਆਪਣਾ ਇੱਕ ਵਿਲੱਖਣ ਸਥਾਨ ਬਣਾ ਚੁੱਕਾ ਸੀ। ਭਾਰਤੀ ਖਾਸ ਕਰ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਸਾਹਿਤ ਅਤੇ ਸੱਭਿਆਚਾਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦੇ ਰੀਤੀ ਰਿਵਾਜਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਜਗ੍ਹਾ ਮਿਲਣੀ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਹੋ ਗਈ ਸੀ। ਇਥੋਂ ਤੱਕ ਕਿ 'ਸ੍ਰੀ ਆਦਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਗੁਰੂਆਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਰੂਹਾਨੀ ਕਵੀਆਂ ਦੀ  ਬਾਣੀ ਨੂੰ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਅਤੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਸਮੇਤ ਗੁਰੂਆਂ ਅਤੇ ਭਗਤਾਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਰੀਤਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਲਿਖਤਾਂ ਦਾ ਵਿਸ਼ਾ ਬਣਾਇਆ ਗਿਆ, ਜਿਵੇਂ ਵਜ਼ੂ, ਨਮਾਜ਼, ਰੋਜ਼ਾ, ਹੱਜ, ਆਦਿ। ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਬਾਰੇ ਬਹੁਤ ਸਾਰੀਆਂ ਤੁਕਾਂ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਸਿਧਾਂਤਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਪੇਸ਼ ਕਰਦੀਆਂ ਮਿਲ ਜਾਂਦੀਆਂ ਹਨ।

ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦਾ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਨਾਲ ਸੰਬੰਧ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਅਤੇ ਭਾਈ ਮਰਦਾਨੇ ਦੀ ਦੋਸਤੀ ਨਾਲ ਹੀ ਜੁੜ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਸਿਧਾਤਾਂ ਦਾ ਅਧਿਐਨ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਦੇ ਨਾਲ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਜਗਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਆਈਆਂ ਊਣਤਾਈਆਂ ਉੱਪਰ ਤੰਦ ਵੀ ਕਸ਼ਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਇੱਕ ਸੱਚੇ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਦੇ ਕਰਤੱਬਾਂ ਦਾ ਵਰਣਨ ਆਪਣੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਰਾਹੀਂ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ। ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਤੋਂ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਤੱਕ ਗੁਰੂਆਂ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖੀ ਦਾ ਵਾਸਤਾ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਨਾਲ ਰਿਹਾ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਕਾਰਨ ਉਸ ਸਮੇਂ ਰਾਜਨੀਤਿਕ ਸੱਤਾ ਉੱਪਰ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਨਾਲ ਸੰਬੰਧਿਤ ਸ਼ਾਸਕਾਂ ਦਾ ਕਬਜਾ ਸੀ। ਜਿੱਥੇ ਜਹਾਂਗੀਰ ਅਤੇ ਔਰੰਗਜੇਬ ਵਰਗੇ ਮੁਗਲ ਬਾਦਸ਼ਾਹ ਆਪਣੇ ਨਿੱਜੀ ਸੁਆਰਥਾਂ ਲਈ ਕ੍ਰਮਵਾਰ ਗੁਰੂ ਅਰਜਨ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਅਤੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਤੇਗ ਬਹਾਦਰ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਸ਼ਹਾਦਤ ਲਈ ਜਿੰਮੇਵਾਰ ਸਨ ਉੱਥੇ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਦੇ ਅਸਲ ਸਿਧਾਂਤਾ ਨੂੰ ਸਮਝਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਮਰਦਾਨੇ ਤੋਂ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਪੀਰ ਬੁੱਧੂ ਸ਼ਾਹ, ਗਨੀ ਖਾਨ, ਨਬੀ ਖਾਨ ਹਮੇਸ਼ਾ ਸੱਚ ਵਾਲੇ ਪਾਸੇ ਖੜ੍ਹਦੇ ਰਹੇ। ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਉਹ ਚੰਗੀ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਮਝਦੇ ਸਨ ਕਿ ਹਾਕਮ ਧਿਰ ਆਪਣੇ ਨਿੱਜੀ ਸੁਆਰਥਾਂ ਲਈ ਹਮੇਸ਼ਾ ਧਰਮ ਦੇ ਸਿਧਾਂਤਾਂ ਦਾ ਘਾਣ ਕਰਦੀ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ।

ਜਦੋਂ ਅਸੀਂ 'ਆਦਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ' ਵਿੱਚ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦਾ ਜ਼ਿਕਰ ਦੇਖਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਇੱਕੋ ਗੱਲ ਵਾਰ-ਵਾਰ ਸ਼ਪਸਟ ਹੁੰਦੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦਾ ਮਕਸਦ ਕਿਸੇ ਖਾਸ ਨਿਯਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਬੱਝ ਕੇ ਕੋਈ ਕਰਮ ਕਾਂਡ ਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਪ੍ਰੋੜਤਾ ਕਰਨਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ ਸਗੋਂ ਦੂਸਰੇ ਪਾਸੇ ਜੋ ਗੱਲ ਸਪਸ਼ਟ ਹੁੰਦੀ ਹੈ ਉਹ ਇਹ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਾਡੇ ਲਈ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਨਿਤਨੇਮ ਨੂੰ ਅਪਣਾਉਣ ਦੇ ਨਾਲ- ਨਾਲ ਇਹ ਜਰੂਰੀ ਹੋ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਇਹ ਕਰਮਕਾਂਡ ਕਰਨ ਦੇ ਨਾਲ-ਨਾਲ ਸਾਡਾ ਜੀਵਨ ਆਦਰਸ਼ਵਾਦੀ ਹੋਵੇ ਤੇ ਇੱਕ ਸੱਚੇ ਅਤੇ ਸਪੱਸਟ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਵਾਂਗ ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸ ਸੰਸਾਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਆਪਣਾ ਜੀਵਨ ਜੀਵੀਏ । ਗਰੁਬਾਣੀ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਅਸੀਂ ਆਪਣੇ ਅੰਦਰ ਅਜਿਹੇ ਗੁਣ ਪੈਦਾ ਕਰੀਏ ਕਿ ਸਾਡਾ ਜੀਵਣ ਦੂਸਰਿਆਂ ਲਈ ਪ੍ਰੇਰਣਾ ਬਣੇ। ਜੇਕਰ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਆਪਣੇ ਜੀਵਨ ਵਿੱਚ ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ ਸੱਚਾ ਅਤੇ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਆਦਰਸ਼ਵਾਦੀ ਬਣਾਉਣ ਦੀਆਂ ਸੰਭਾਵਨਾਵਾਂ ਨਹੀਂ ਰੱਖਦਾ ਤਾਂ ਉਸ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਪੜੀਆਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ ਦੀ ਕੋਈ ਸਾਰਥਿਕਤਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਰਹਿ ਜਾਂਦੀ । ਸੋ ਜਦੋਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਵਿਚਾਰਾਂ ਦੀ ਗੱਲ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਇੱਕ ਗੱਲ ਮੁਢਲੇ ਰੂਪ ਵਿੱਚ ਹੀ ਸਪੱਸ਼ਟ ਹੋ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪੜਨ ਤੋਂ ਵੱਧ ਜਰੂਰੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਉਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਮਾਜ਼ੀ ਹੋਣ ਤੋਂ ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਇੱਕ ਚੰਗੇ ਇਨਸਾਨ ਹੋਣ ਦੇ ਗੁਣ ਹੋਣੇ ਅਤਿ ਜਰੂਰੀ ਹਨ।

ਹੇਠਾਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਕੁਝ ਪੰਗਤੀਆਂ ਰਾਹੀਂ 'ਸ੍ਰੀ ਆਦਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ' ਵਿੱਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਵਿਚਾਰਾਂ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ:

ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਜੋ ਆਦਮੀ ਮੌਤ ਦੇ ਭੈ ਤੋਂ ਪੰਜੇ ਵਕਤ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਅਤੇ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਆਦਿ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਕਿਤਾਬਾਂ ਪੜ੍ਹਦਾ ਹੈ ਉਹ ਕੁਦਰਤ ਦੇ ਵਰਤਾਰੇ ਦੀ ਉਲੰਘਣਾ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ। ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪੜ੍ਹਣ ਨਾਲ ਮੌਤ ਤੋਂ ਬਚਿਆ ਨਹੀਂ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਮੌਤ ਵੀ ਕੁਦਰਤ ਦੇ ਵਰਤਾਰੇ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਅਹਿਮ ਪੜਾਅ ਹੈ:

ਪੰਜ ਵਖਤ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਗੁਜਾਰਹਿ ਪੜਹਿ ਕਤੇਬ ਕੁਰਾਣਾ॥ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਆਖੈ ਹੋਰ ਸਦੇਈ ਰਹਿਓ ਪੀਣਾ ਖਾਣਾ ॥ (ਪੰਨਾ 24)

ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ- ਕਿ ਇੱਕ ਸੱਚੇ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਲਈ ਇਹ ਗੱਲਾਂ ਵੀ ਜਰੂਰੀ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਚਰਿੱਤਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਉੱਚੇ ਗੁਣ ਹੋਣੇ ਚਾਹੀਦੇ ਹਨ, ਇੱਕ ਸੱਚੇ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਦਾ ਉੱਚਾ ਆਚਰਣ ਕਾਬਾ ਹੋਵੇ, ਅੰਦਰੋਂ ਬਾਹਰੋਂ ਇਕੋ ਜਿਹੇ ਰਹਿਣਾ ਭਾਵ ਸੱਚਾ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਹੋਣਾ ਪੀਰ ਹੋਵੇ, ਨੇਕ ਅਮਲਾਂ ਦੀ ਨਿਮਾਜ਼ ਤੇ ਕਲਮਾ ਬਣੇ। ਕਰਣੀ ਕਾਬਾ ਸਚੁ ਪੀਰੁ ਕਲਮਾ ਕਰਮ ਨਿਵਾਜ॥

ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦੀ ਬਹੁਤ ਹੀ ਦਿਲ ਖਿਚਵੀਂ ਵਿਆਖਿਆ ਕਰਦੇ ਹੋਏ ਇਸ ਦੇ ਪੰਜਾਂ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਰਾਂ ਦੀ ਆਪਣੀ ਸਵਤੰਤਰ ਵਿਆਖਿਆ ਕਰਦੇ ਹੋਏ ਕਹਿੰਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਨਜ਼ਰ ਵਿੱਚ ਅਸਲ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਉਹ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਹੇਠ ਲਿਖੀਆਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੀ ਰੋਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਜਿੰਦਗੀ (ਨਿੱਤਨੇਮ) ਵਿੱਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ। ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ 'ਸੱਚ' ਹੈ। ਹੱਕ-ਹਲਾਲ ਦੀ ਕਮਾਈ ਖਾਣਾ ਦੂਸਰੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਜਗਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਸਭ ਦੀ ਖੈਰ ਮੰਗਣਾ ਤੀਸਰੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਹੈ। ਚੌਥੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦੀ ਨੀਅਤ ਧਰਨ ਦਾ ਮਤਲਬ ਮਨ ਨੂੰ ਸ਼ਾਫ ਰਖਣਾ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਪੰਜਵੀਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦੀ ਸਿਫਤ ਸਲਾਹ ਅਤੇ ਵਡਿਆਈ ਕਰਨਾ ਹੈ। ਆਪਣੇ ਚੰਗੇ ਕਰਮ (ਚੰਗਾ ਆਚਰਨ) ਰੂਪੀ ਕਲਮਾ ਪੜ੍ਹ ਕੇ ਹੀ ਕੋਈ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਅਖਵਾ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ। ਜੋ ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾਂ ਸਭ ਕੂੜ ਕਰ ਕੇ ਕੂੜ ਵਿੱਚ ਹੀ ਪਾ ਦੇਣਾ ਹੈ।

ਪੰਜਿ ਨਿਵਾਜਾ ਵਖਤ ਪੰਜਿ ਪੰਜਾ ਪੰਜੇ ਨਾਉ ॥

ਪਹਿਲਾ ਸਚੁ ਹਲਾਲ ਦੁਇ ਤੀਜਾ ਖੈਰ ਖੁਦਾਇ॥

ਚਉਥੀ ਨੀਅਤਿ ਰਾਸਿ ਮਨੁ ਪੰਜਵੀ ਸਿਫਤਿ ਸਨਾਇ ॥

ਕਰਣੀ ਕਲਮਾ ਆਖਿ ਕੈ ਤਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਸਦਾਇ ॥

ਨਾਨਕ ਜੇਤੇ ਕੂੜਿਆਰ ਕੂੜੈ ਕੂੜੀ ਪਾਇ ॥੩॥ (ਪੰਨਾ 141)

ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਉਸ ਵੇਲੇ ਦੇ ਹਾਕਮਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਅੱਤਿਆਚਾਰ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਰਾਜ ਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਆਂ ਬਾਰੇ ਗੱਲ ਕਰਦੇ ਹੋਏ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਮਾਣਸ ਖਾਣੇ ਕਹਿੰਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਨਾਲ ਹੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਇਹ ਮਾਣਸ ਖਾਣੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਮਾਨਸਿਕ ਸੰਤੁਸ਼ਟੀ ਲਈ ਨਮਾਜ਼ਾਂ ਦਾ ਸਹਾਰਾ ਲੈਂਦੇ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਕਿ ਸਭ ਵਿਅਰਥ ਹੈ।

ਮਾਣਸ ਖਾਣੇ ਕਰਹਿ ਨਿਵਾਜ॥ (ਪੰਨਾ 471-472)

ਭਗਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਰੋਜ਼ਾ ਰੱਖਿਆਂ ਜਾਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਗੁਜਾਰਨ ਨਾਲ ਜੰਨਤ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲ ਜਾਂਦੀ। ਭਗਤ ਜੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਸਾਡੇ ਅੰਦਰ ਹੀ ਕਾਬਾ ਹੈ ਜੇਕਰ ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸ ਨੂੰ ਪਛਾਣ ਲਈਏ। ਸਭਨਾ ਨਾਲ ਨਿਆਂ ਕਰਨਾ ਹੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਹੈ ਆਪਣੀ ਅਕਲ ਨਾਲ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਨੂੰ ਜਾਣ ਲੈਣਾ ਹੀ ਕਲਮਾ ਹੈ ।

ਰੋਜਾ ਧਰੈ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਗੁਜਾਰੈ ਕਲਮਾ ਭਿਸਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਈ॥

ਸਤਰਿ ਕਾਬਾ ਘਟ ਹੀ ਭੀਤਰਿ ਜੋ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨੈ ਕੋਈ॥

ਨਿਵਾਜ ਸੋਈ ਜੋ ਨਿਆਉ ਬਿਚਾਰੈ ਕਲਮਾ ਅਕਲਹਿ ਜਾਨੈ॥੨ (ਪੰਨਾ 480)

ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਫਰਮਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ ਸੱਚ ਹੈ ਇਹ ਹੀ (ਹੇ ਮਨੁੱਖ) ਤੇਰੀ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਹੋਣੀ ਚਾਹੀਦੀ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਉੱਪਰ ਭਰੋਸਾ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪੜ੍ਹਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਮੁਸੱਲੇ (ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪੜ੍ਹਣ ਲਈ ਵਿਛਾਈ ਜਾਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਚਟਾਈ) ਵਾਂਗ ਹੋਣਾ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ।

ਸਚੁ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਯਕੀਨ ਮੁਸਲਾ॥ (ਪੰਨਾ 1083)

ਜਿਵੇਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਜਿਕਰ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਅਤੇ ਭਾਈ ਮਰਦਾਨਾ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਦੋਸਤੀ ਨੇ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਰਿਸਤਿਆਂ ਦਾ ਮੁੱਢ ਬੰਨ੍ਹਿਆਂ ਅਤੇ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਮੌਕੇ ਦੀ ਯਾਤਰਾ ਨੇ ਇਸ ਰਿਸਤੇ ਨੂੰ ਹੋਰ ਪਕੋਰਿਆਂ ਕੀਤਾ, ਜਿਸ ਕਾਰਨ ਅੱਜ ਵੀ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਬਾਬਾ ਨਾਨਕ ਨੂੰ ਰੂਹਾਨੀ ਫ਼ਕੀਰ ਵਜੋਂ ਮਾਨਤਾ ਦਿੰਦੇ ਹਨ। ਜਦੋਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਕਾਲ ਸਮੇਂ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੀ ਗੱਲ ਤੋਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਉਸ ਸਮੇਂ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਧਰਮ ਦਾ ਹੀ ਬੋਲਬਾਲਾ ਸੀ । ਇਸ ਲਈ ਉਸ ਸਮੇਂ ਦੀ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ, ਰਾਜਨੀਤਿਕ, ਸਮਾਜਿਕ ਲਿਖਤ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨੀ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਤੋਂ ਸੱਖਣੀ ਨਾ ਰਹਿ ਸਕੀ। ਪੰਜਾਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਭਾਵੇਂ ਸਿੱਖ ਅਤੇ ਮੁਸਲਿਮ ਧਰਮ ਕਦੇ ਪੂਰਨ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਇੱਕ ਦੂਸਰੇ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਾ ਸਮਾ ਸਕੇ ਪਰ ਸਮਾਜਿਕ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਜਦੋਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੀ ਗੱਲ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਦੋਹਾਂ ਧਰਮਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਪੂਰਨ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਕਰ ਕੇ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਸੱਭਿਆਚਾਰ ਦਾ ਅਧਿਐਨ ਨਹੀਂ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ।

ਜੇਕਰ ਅਸੀਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦੀਆਂ ਸਿੱਖਿਆਵਾਂ ਦਾ ਜਿਕਰ ਕਰੀਏ ਤਾਂ ਬਹੁਤ ਹੱਦ ਤੱਕ ਇਹ ਆਪਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੇਲ ਵੀ ਖਾਂਦੀਆਂ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਕਈ ਥਾਂ ਵਿਰੋਧਭਾਸ ਵੀ ਮਿਲ ਜਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ। ਇਸਲਾਮ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਮਢੀਆਂ ਮਸਾਣੀਆਂ ਦੀ ਪੂਜਾ ਦਾ ਵਿਰੋਧ ਕੀਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ। ਦੋਵੇਂ ਧਰਮ ਆਪਣੇ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥਾਂ ' ਪਵਿੱਤਰ ਕੁਰਾਨ ' ਅਤੇ ' ਆਦਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ' ਵਿੱਚ ਅਟੁੱਟ ਵਿਸਵਾਸ਼ ਰਖਦੇ ਹਨ। ਦੋਹਾਂ ਧਰਮਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ' ਦਸਵੰਧ ' ਅਤੇ ' ਜਕਾਤ ' ਦੇ ਨਾਮ ਤੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਕਮਾਈ ਵਿੱਚੋਂ ਧਰਮ ਹਿੱਤ ਦਾਨ ਦੇਣ ਦੀ ਨਸ਼ੀਹਤ ਮਿਲਦੀ ਹੈ । ਦੋਹਾਂ ਧਰਮਾਂ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਹੀ ਰੱਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਯਕੀਨ ਇਹਨਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਫਿਰ ਤੋਂ ਇਕੱਠਿਆਂ ਕਰ ਦਿੰਦਾ ਹੈ।

ਨਮਾਜ਼ 'ਅਲਾਹ ਅਕਬਰ ਤੋਂ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਹੁੰਦੀ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਰਥ ਹੈ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਸਭ ਤੋਂ ਵੱਡਾ ਹੈ। ਇਸਲਾਮ ਵਿੱਚ ਇੱਕ ਰੱਬ ਦੇ ਸੰਕਲਪ ਉੱਪਰ ਹੀ ਸਾਰੀ ਫਿਲਾਸਪੀ ਨਿਰਧਾਰਿਤ ਹੈ। ਰੱਬ ਤੋਂ ਵੱਡਾ ਕੋਈ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਨਾ ਹੀ ਕੋਈ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਦਾ ਹੈ ਭਾਵ ਉਸ ਦਾ ਕੋਈ ਸ਼ਰੀਕ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ।

ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਵੀ 'ੴ' ਦਾ ਸੰਕਲਪ ਵੀ ਰੱਬ ਦੇ ਇੱਕੋ ਹੋਣ ਦੀ ਧਾਰਨਾ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਤੀਪਾਲਣ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ। ਭਾਵ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਇੱਕ ਹੈ, ਨਾ ਕੋਈ ਇਸ ਵਰਗਾ ਦੂਸਰਾ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਅਤੇ ਨਾ ਹੀ ਕੋਈ ਇਸ ਦੇ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਦਾ ਹੈ।

ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਇਸਲਾਮ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਧਰਮ ਦਾ ਮੂਲ ਸਿਧਾਂਤ ਇੱਕ ਰੱਬ ਦੀ ਧਾਰਨਾ ਉੱਪਰ ਟਿਕਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ वै।

-ਸਭਨਾ ਕਾ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਏਕੁ ਹੈ ਦੂਜਾ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ॥

-ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਏਕੋ ਬੁਝਿਆ ਏਕਸੁ ਮਾਹਿ ਸਮਾਇ॥

ਅੱਗੇ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦੀ ਸ਼ੁਰੂਆਤ 'ਸੂਰਤ ਫ਼ਾਤਿਹਾ' ਨਾਲ ਹੁੰਦੀ ਹੈ। ਜਿਸ ਦੇ ਅਰਥ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹਨ:

ਮੈਂ ਅਤੀ ਦਿਆਲੂ ਅਤੇ ਕਿਰਪਾਲੂ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਦਾ ਨਾਂ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਕਰਦਾ ਹਾਂ। ਹਰੇਕ ਉਪਮਾ ਦਾ ਅਧਿਕਾਰੀ ਸਾਰੇ ਜਹਾਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਸਿਰਜਨਹਾਰ ਤੇ ਪਾਲਨਹਾਰ ਅਲਾਹ ਹੀ ਹੈ, ਜੋ ਅਤਿ ਦਿਆਲੂ ਅਤੇ ਕਿਰਪਾਲੂ ਹੈ। ਉਹ ਲੇਖੇ ਦੇ ਦਿਨ ਦਾ ਵੀ ਮਾਲਕ ਹੈ। (ਹੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ) ਅਸੀਂ ਕੇਵਲ ਤੇਰਾ ਹੀ ਨਾਮ ਜਪਦੇ ਹਾਂ ਤੇ ਤੇਰੇ ਤੋਂ ਹੀ ਸਹਾਇਤਾ ਮੰਗਦੇ ਹਾਂ । ਤੂੰ ਸਾਨੂੰ ਸਿੱਧੇ ਮਾਰਗ ਵੱਲ ਲਗਾਈ ਰੱਖ, ਉਹਨਾਂ ਧਰਮੀਆਂ ਦੇ ਮਾਰਗ ਵੱਲ, ਜੋ ਤੇਰੀ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਦੇ ਪਾਤਰ ਬਣੇ। ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਮਾਰਗ ਵੱਲ ਨਹੀਂ, ਜੋ ਤੇਰੀ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਦੇ ਭਾਗੀ ਬਣੇ, ਜਾਂ ਤੈਥੋਂ ਦੂਰ ਚਲੇ ਗਏ, ਤੂੰ ਅਜਿਹਾ ਹੀ ਕਰ ।

ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਵੀ ਵਾਰ-ਵਾਰ ਇਹ ਜਿਕਰ ਆਉਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦਿਆਲੂ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਸਭ ਤੇ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈ।

-ਜਿਸ ਕਾ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਕੈਸੀ ਮੋਹਿ ਰਾਮਿ ਰਤਾ ਰੈ॥

-ਹਰਿ ਕੀ ਦਇਆ ਹੋਇ ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਸਦਾ ਸਦਾ ਰਹੈ ਸੁਖਵਾਨੀ । ਹਰਿ ਦੀਆ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਸਦੈਵ ਦਇਆਲੁ।

-ਸਚਾ ਸਚਾ ਕਿਆ ਰੱਬੁ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਹੈ ਜਿਹਦਾ ਕਦੇ ਨਾ ਹੂਹੈ।

ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਆਮ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ 'ਸੂਰਤ ਇਖ਼ਲਾਸ' ਪੜ੍ਹੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਨੁਵਾਦ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ:

ਇਹ ਐਲਾਨ ਕਰ ਦਿਓ ਕਿ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਇੱਕ ਹੈ, ਉਹ ਕਿਸੇ ਦਾ ਮੁਹਤਾਜ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ, ਸਭ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਮੁਹਤਾਜ ਹਨ। ਉਹ ਮਾਤਾ-ਪਿਤਾ ਅਤੇ ਧੀਆਂ-ਪੁੱਤਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਰਹਿਤ ਹੈ।ਉਸ ਜਿਹਾ ਹੋਰ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ, ਉਹ ਆਪਣੇ ਜਿਹਾ ਇੱਕੋ ਇੱਕ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੈ।

-ਨਾਨਕੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਹਾਨੀ ਜਿ ਮਾਂ ਬਾਪੁ ਰਖਿਆ॥

-ਨਾਨਕ ਓਹ ਬੇਅੰਤੁ ਬੈਪੁ, ਜਿ ਮਾਂ ਬਾਪੁ ਰਖੇ॥

-ਨ ਬਾਪੁ ਨ ਮਾਂ ਪੇਖੀਅਹਿ ਨ ਬੰਧਨਿ ਨ ਜਾਇ॥

-ਨ ਮਾਂ ਨ ਬਾਪੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ।

-ਨਾਨਕ ਨਾਮੁ ਅਰਾਧਿ ਲੀਜੈ, ਜਿਨਿ ਮਾਂ ਬਾਪੁ ਨ ਪਾਈ ॥

ਹੇਠਾਂ ਬੈਠਣ ਸਮੇਂ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਦਾ ਜੋ ਹਿੱਸਾ ਪੜ੍ਹਿਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ 'ਤਸ਼ਹੱਦ' ਕਹਿੰਦੇ ਹਨ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਨੁਵਾਦ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ:

ਸਾਰੇ ਜਪ ਤਪ ਤੇ ਦਾਨ-ਪੁੰਨ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਹੀ ਯੋਗ ਹਨ (ਅਰਥਾਤ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਤੋਂ ਛੁੱਟ ਹੋਰ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਵਿਅਕਤੀ ਦੀ ਭਜਨ ਬੰਦਗੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਨੀ ਚਾਹੀਦੀ) ਹੋ ਨਬੀ! (ਹਜਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ) ਤੇਰੇ ਉੱਪਰ ਅਤੇ ਸਾਡੇ ਉੱਪਰ ਸਲਾਮਤੀ, ਰਹਿਮਤ ਤੇ ਬਰਕਤ ਹੋਵੇ ਅਤੇ ਅਲੱਹ ਦੇ ਸਾਰੇ ਭਲੇ-ਪੁਰਸ਼ਾਂ ਉੱਤੇ ਵੀ ਸਲਾਮਤੀ ਹੋਵੇ। ਮੈਂ ਗਵਾਹੀ ਦਿੰਦਾ ਹਾਂ ਕਿ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਤੋਂ ਛੁੱਟ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਇਸ਼ਟ ਨਹੀਂ ਉਹ ਇੱਕੋ ਇੱਕ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਮੈਂ ਇਹ ਗਵਾਹੀ ਵੀ ਦਿੰਦਾ ਹਾਂ ਕਿ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ (ਸਾਹਿਬ) ਉਸ ਦੇ ਸਾਜੇ ਹੋਏ ਰਸੂਲ ਅਤੇ ਬੰਦੇ ਹਨ (ਮਤਲਬ ਰੱਬ ਨਹੀਂ ਹਨ) ।

ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾਂ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਬੰਦਗੀ ਦੇ ਯੋਗ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ। ਪ੍ਰਮਤਾਮਾ ਤੋਂ ਛੁੱਟ ਕਿਸੇ ਦੀ ਵੀ ਬੰਦਗੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਨੀ ਚਾਹੀਦੀ।

ਕਿਵ ਨ ਆਰਾਧੀਐ ਜਿਨਿ ਸੇਵਾ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਕੀ ।

ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਇੱਕੋ ਹੀ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਇਸ ਦੇ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਦਾ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ। ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਉਹ ਜਨਮ ਅਤੇ ਮਰਨ ਤੋਂ ਪਾਰ ਹੈ।

ਸਾਂਝੀ ਨ ਪਾਈਐ ਕਿਤੈ ਨਾਲਿ, ਅਜੋਨੀ ਅਪਾਰਾ ਹੈ ਸਾਰਾ॥

ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਬੈਠੇ ਬੈਠੇ ਹੀ ਦਰੂਦ ਸ਼ਰੀਫ਼ ਵੀ ਪੜਿਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਨੁਵਾਦ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ -

ਹੋ ਅੱਲਾਹ। ਤੂੰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ (ਸਾਹਿਬ) ਅਤੇ ਆਪ ਦੇ ਅਨੁਯਾਈਆਂ ਉੱਤੇ ਮਿਹਰ ਕਰ। ਜਿਵੇਂ ਕਿ ਤੂੰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਇਬਰਾਹੀਮ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਅਨੁਯਾਈਆਂ ਉੱਤੇ ਮਿਹਰ ਕੀਤੀ ਸੀ। ਤੂੰ ਹੀ ਹਰ ਉਪਮਾ ਦਾ ਅਧਿਕਾਰੀ ਅਤੇ ਬਲਵਾਨ ਹੈਂ ।

ਹੇ ਅੱਲਾਹ! ਤੂੰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ (ਸਾਹਿਬ) ਅਤੇ ਆਪ ਦੇ ਅਨੁਯਾਈਆਂ ਬਰਕਤ ਦੇ, ਜਿਵੇਂ ਕਿ ਤੂੰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਇਬਰਾਹੀਮ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਦੇ ਅਨੁਯਾਈਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਬਰਕਤ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਸੀ। ਤੂੰ ਹੀ ਹਰ ਉਪਮਾ ਦਾ ਅਧਿਕਾਰੀ ਅਤੇ ਬਲਵਾਨ ਹੈਂ।

ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਦੁਆ ਪੜ੍ਹੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ। ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਨੁਵਾਦ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ:

ਹੋ ਅੱਲਾਹ ਮੈਂ ਆਪਣੀ ਜਾਨ ਤੇ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਜ਼ੁਲਮ ਕੀਤੇ ਹਨ । ਤੇਰੇ ਤੋਂ ਇਲਾਵਾ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ਣਹਾਰ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ। ਤੂੰ ਆਪਣੀ ਮਿਹਰ ਨਾਲ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ ਲੈ । ਤੂੰ ਹੀ ਵੱਡਾ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ਣਹਾਰ ਤੇ ਮਿਹਰਬਾਨ ਹੈਂ।

ਦੂਸਰੀ ਦੁਆ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ

ਦੁਆ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ -

ਹੇ ਅੱਲਾਹ! ਮੈਨੂੰ ਨਮਾਜ਼ ਪੜ੍ਹਦੇ ਰਹਿਣ ਦਾ ਬਲ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ ਤੇ ਮੇਰੀ ਸੰਤਾਨ ਨੂੰ ਵੀ। ਹੇ ਮੇਰੇ ਸਾਜਨਹਾਰ ਤੇ ਪਾਲਨਹਾਰ! ਮੇਰੀ ਇਹ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਪਰਵਾਨ ਕਰ । ਹੇ ਮੇਰੇ ਸਾਜਨਹਾਰ ਤੇ ਪਾਲਨਹਾਰ! ਲੇਖੇ ਦੋ ਦਿਨ ਮੇਰੇ ਮਾਪਿਆਂ, ਮੋਮਨਾਂ (ਅਲੱਹ ਵਿੱਚ ਵਿਸ਼ਵਾਸ ਰੱਖਣ ਵਾਲਾ), ਅਤੇ ਸਾਰੇ ਸਾਕ ਸੰਬੰਧੀਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ ਦੇਣਾ।

 ਹਵਾਲੇ

 1.ਇਸਲਾਮ ਧਰਮ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਇਸ ਦਿਨ ਪੈਗੰਬਰ ਹਜ਼ਰਤ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੰਨਤ ਵੱਲ ਯਾਤਰਾ ਕਰ ਕੇ ਵਾਪਿਸ ਆਏ ਸਨ।

With Blessings of Satguru Uday Singh Ji, Namdhari FC Reigns as Table-Toppers After 10th Week in I-League 2024-25

Namdhari FC has ascended to the top of the I-League 2024-25 standings after an impressive 10th week of action. Accumulating 20 points from 10 matches, the team has showcased remarkable consistency and dominance, cementing its place as the league leader.

Their latest triumph, a commanding 5-2 victory over Shillong Lajong FC on January 25, 2025, marked their fourth consecutive win and extended their unbeaten streak to seven games. Powered by Peter Haokip’s clinical brace and the dynamic contributions of Brazilian stars Vicente De Paula Mercedes and Cledson Carvalho Dasilva, Namdhari FC has proven to be a force to reckon with this season.

With Satguru Ji's guidance and unwavering support from their fans, Namdhari FC has entered a critical phase of the league as firm title contenders. Fans and followers will be eager to see if their team can maintain this momentum and march towards I-League glory.

Watch Instagram post

15 दिसम्बर की सुबह हरि मंदिर में आसा दी वार की भोग की अरदास में जब सूबा बलविंदर सिंह जी ने उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी की तंदुरूस्ती के लिए अरदास की तो मेरे दिल को धक्का सा लगा और मन मे नकारात्मक विचार आने लगे क्योंकि मुझे 15 नवंबर को ही प्रसिद्ध तबला वादक पं योगेश समसी जी से चर्चा के दौरान द्वारा ज्ञात हुआ था कि उस्ताद जी की सेहत ठीक नहीं चल रही है। हम सभी उनके स्वास्थ को लेकर चिंतित तो थे लेकिन जब अरदास में उनका नाम आया तो ये चिंता और बढ़ गई। आसा दी वार के बाद जब मैं घर आया तो करीब आधे घंटे बाद हजूरी रागी बलवंत सिंह जी का फोन आया कि ज़ाकिर भाई ICU में हैं और उनकी सेहत बहुत ख़राब है, ये सुनते ही जैसे पैरों तले जमीन खिसक गई और दिल की धड़कने और बढ़ गई। मैंने तुरंत पंडित योगेश समसी जी (योगेश भैया) को फोन किया तो उन्होंने कहा कि किसी भी समय कुछ भी हो सकता है, उनकी सेहत के लिए सद्‌गुरु जी के चरणों में अरदास करो। बलवंत सिंह जी ने परम पूज्य सद्‌गुरु जी से फोन पर अर्ज़ की तो हुक्म हुआ कि ज़ाकिर भाई ने बहुत जल्दी भाणा वरता लिया।

16 दिसम्बर (अमरिका की 15 दिसम्बर) को योगेश भैया का मैसेज आता है कि "ज़ाकिर भाई इस दुनिया मे नही रहे" ..... आज भी इस ख़बर की सच्चाई पर विश्वास नहीं होता..... । यह सच है कि जो आया है उसने जाना भी है..... लेकिन इतनी जल्दी....??
उनके निधन की ख़बर से सारा संगीत जगत शोक की लहर में समा गया। कोई भी इस ख़बर पर विश्वास नहीं कर पा रहा था.....
पद्मविभूषण उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी के विषय मे कुछ भी कहना या लिखना सूरज को दिया दिखाने के जैसा है। वह एक विश्व प्रसिद्ध और महान कलाकार तो थे ही उसके साथ - साथ वे एक महान इंसान भी थे जिनका कोई सानी नहीं।

एक ज़माना था जब तबला वादकों को निम्न श्रेणी में रखा जाता था और और उनको इतना सम्मान भी नहीं मिलता था जितना शास्त्रीय संगीत के गायकों या तंत्र वाद्य के कलाकारों को मिलता था। तबले का शास्त्रीय संगीत में आज जो स्थान है उसका श्रेय बहुत से बुजुर्ग कलाकारों जैसे उस्ताद अहमद जान थिरकवा, उस्ताद अमीर हुसैन खान, उस्ताद हबीबुद्दीन खान, उस्ताद अल्लारक्खा खान, पंडित किशन महाराज, पंडित सामता प्रसाद, पंडित अनोखे लाल मिश्रा आदि को तो जाता ही है लेकिन तबले को विश्व पटल पर प्रसिद्ध, प्रचलित और एक विशेष पहचान दिलाने का श्रेय यदि किसी कलाकार को जाता है तो वो उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन हैं।

विश्व के अलग-अलग देशों के महान संगीतज्ञों के साथ तबले के नाद का कैसे- कैसे प्रयोग हो सकता है ये उन्होंने बखूबी कर के दिखाया और तबले को वैश्विक संगीत में एक विशेष स्थान दिलवाया। उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन बहुमुखी प्रतिभा के धनी थे। वे तबला के अलावा और भी कई साज़ बखूबी बजा लेते थे। उन्होंने एक म्यूजिक बैंड "शक्ति" बनाया जो विश्व भर मे बहुत प्रसिद्ध हुआ। उन्होंने फ़िल्मों में संगीत निर्देशन भी दिया, गाया भी और कई फ़िल्मों में अभिनेता के रूप मे भी नज़र आए।

तबला सोलो वादन में उनका योगदान अद्वितीय है। वे हर घराने का तबला बजाने मे निपुण थे और सच तो यह है कि उन्होंने तबला वादन को घराने की संकीर्णता से मुक्त किया। एक ज़माना था जब एक घराने का तबला वादक या गुरु अपने शिष्यों को दूसरे घराने के वादकों का तबला सीखना तो दूर सुनने भी नहीं देते थे। "मेरा घराना दूसरों से श्रेष्ठ है" तबला वादकों के इस अहंकार को ज़ाकिर जी ने बहुत विनम्रता, प्रेम और सद्भावना के साथ तोड़ा और तबले को घराने की संकीर्णता से मुक्ति दिलाई। उन्होंने बहुत प्रेम और आदर के साथ हर घराने की खूबियों को अपनाया और अपने वादन के द्वारा उनका प्रचार भी किया। आज कोई स्वीकार करे या न करे पर हर घराने का तबला वादक उनका अनुकरण करता है और उनके जैसा बनना चाहता है।

उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी कहा करते थे कि "तबला मुख्य रूप से संगत का वाद्य है, एक श्रेष्ठ तबला वादक वही है जिसमें अलग-अलग कलाकारों के साथ संगत करने की कुशलता हो" । एक संगतकार के रूप मे उन्होने जो सफल प्रयोग किए वो अपने आप मे बेजोड़ हैं।
उन्होंने साथ-संगत की एक नई शैली को जन्म दिया। वे जिस कलाकार के साथ भी तबला संगत करते थे उस कलाकार की प्रस्तुति में उनकी संगत से चार चाँद लग जाते थे । ज़ाकिर जी तबला संगत करते समय मुख्य कलाकार के साथ इतना एक रस हो जाते थे कि ऐसा प्रतीत होता था जैसे ज़ाकिर जी अपने साथी कलाकार का मन पढ़ लेते हैं। और यही कारण था कि हर कलाकार का ये सपना होता था कि ज़ाकिर जी उसके साथ संगत करें। लेकिन यह भी सत्य है कि उनके इस गुण के कारण कुछ कलाकार उनको एक संगतकार के रूप मे अपने साथ बैठाना कम पसंद करते थे क्योंकि ज़ाकिर जी संगतकार होते हुए भी श्रोताओं के आकर्षण का केंद्र बन जाते थे।

ज़ाकिर जी एक महान कलाकार होने के साथ-साथ अति विनम्र, सम्वेदनशील, अत्यंत जागरूक और आध्यात्मिक सोच रखने वाले इंसान थे। वे जिससे भी मिलते थे उसे अपने मधुर और विनम्र स्वभाव से अपना बना लेते थे। अपने से बड़ों का आदर सत्कार, बराबर वालों से मित्रता का व्यावहार और छोटों को प्रेम और वात्सल्य भाव से मिलना उनके स्वभाव का विशेष गुण था। इसलिए उनसे मिलने वाले हर व्यक्ति के पास उनसे जुड़ी एक कहानी है।

नामधारी सिख समाज के साथ ज़ाकिर जी का संबंध 1970 के दशक से रहा है जब उन्होंने श्री सद्‌गुरु जगजीत सिंह जी की हजूरी में सद्‌गुरु प्रताप सिंह संगीत सम्मेलनों में लखनउ, औरंगाबाद, मुंबई आदि शहरों में अपनी करिश्माई प्रस्तुति दे कर श्री सद्‌गुरु जगजीत सिंह जी की अपार खुशियां और आशीर्वाद प्राप्त किया। लेकिन अपने कार्यक्रमों की व्यस्तता के कारण वे चाहते हुए भी सन 2010 से पहले श्री भैणी साहिब नहीं आ सके। मुझे आज भी 15 फरवरी 2010 का वह दिन जस की तस याद है जब ज़ाकिर जी अपने प्रिय गुरुभाई पंडित योगेश समसी जी के साथ श्री सद्‌गुरु जगजीत सिंह जी के दर्शन के लिए विशेष तौर पर पहली बार श्री भैणी साहिब पधारे और दोनों ने तबला जुगलबंदी की हाज़िरी लगा के सद्‌गुरु जी की ढेर सारी खुशियां और आशीर्वाद प्राप्त किया। उसके बाद सन् 2014, 2015, 2019 और 2023 में भी ज़ाकिर जी ने सद्‌गुरु उदय सिंह जी की हजूरी में सद्‌गुरु जगजीत सिंह संगीत सम्मेलन में अपनी कला से नामधारी साध संगत और संगीत रसिकों को मंत्र मुग्ध किया तथा सद्‌गुरु उदय सिंह जी की अपार खुशियों के साथ-साथ, साध-संगत और बाहर से आए श्रोताओं का प्यार और दुलार प्राप्त किया।

उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी का इस तरह अचानक दुनिया से विदा हो जाना सारे संगीत जगत और विशेष रूप से नामधारी संगत को एक गहरे दुःख में धकेल गया। उनके निधन से एक सांगीतिक युग का अंत हो गया। ऐसे कलाकार और ऐसे इंसान सदियों में एक बार जन्म लेते हैं। ज़ाकिर जी एक फरिश्ता थे जो 73 वर्षों के लिए पृथ्वी ग्रह पर आए और तबले की दशा और दिशा दोनों बदल गए।
उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी का इस दुनिया से जाना वैश्विक संगीत के लिए अपूर्णीय क्षति है। जब तक सूरज और चाँद हैं उनका तबला और संगीत हम सभी को आध्यात्मिक अनुभूति और आत्मरंजन से ओतप्रोत करता रहेगा । वे भले ही अब शारीरिक रूप से हमारे बीच नही हैं लेकिन अपनी कला के जरिए वो हमेशा हमारे दिलों में रहेंगे।

परम पूज्य सद्‌गुरु जी के चरणों में प्रार्थना है कि वे उस्ताद ज़ाकिर हुसैन जी की जीवात्मा को अपने चरणों में निवास प्रदान करें तथा उनके परिवार, शिष्यों और प्रशंसकों को उनका बिछोड़ा सहन करने की शक्ति प्रदान करें।

- राजेश कुमार मालवीया