Sikh Theology
SPNer
- Oct 31, 2024
- 34
- 3
- 35
The notion that Sri Guru Amardas Ji was once a “nigura” is one of the most shamelessly blasphemous myths that our own community has unquestioningly propagated. The reality, as per Gurbani, is that Sri Guru Amardas Ji is, and always was, the perfect, eternal Satguru Joti, and as such could never be tarnished with such a label.
The myth stems out of the narrative that Baba Amardas had originally been a Vishnu-worshipping Hindu with no prior knowledge of Sikhi. As Sikhs around the world celebrate or prepare to celebrate the Gurpurab of Sri Guru Amardas Ji, it is a good time to revisit this folktale and look deeper into an argument which is the more historically and theologically sound alternative: that Guru Amardas Ji had, in fact, always been a Sikh within proximity to the previous Gurus.
The fabricated folktale posits that Baba Amardas had been a nigura Vaishnav his entire life until one day he heard his daughter-in-law, Bibi Amro Ji (daughter of Guru Angad Dev Ji), sing Gurbani, which then inspired him to go and discover the True Guru for the first time.
Most people are familiar with the “nigura Vaishnav narrative”. It is said that the 3rd Patshah, before being officiated on the throne of Gurgaddi, had been an elusive Vaishnav bhagat, ignorant to the existence of the True Guru. This story would have us believe several clearly illogical points:
- That Guru Amardas Ji had no knowledge of the Gurus until his old age, despite being born only a decade after Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji and essentially living through Guru Nanak Dev Ji’s entire rise to near-international fame.
- That Guru Amardas Ji had had no previous knowledge of Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji despite living within the same region, and despite the fact that Guru Angad Dev Ji was famously well-known in Punjab (to the extent that Mughal emperor Hamayun had visited Guru Sahib for political advice).
- That Guru Amardas Ji never had heard Gurbani until Bibi Amro Ji moved into the family household. This would assume that Guru Amardas Ji either did not attend the Anand Karaj of his own brother’s son (whom he lived with), or that he did attend but Gurbani was not recited there and he somehow did not meet Guru Angad Dev Ji. Perhaps Guru Angad Dev Ji hosted a non-Sikh wedding for his own daughter and then decided not to be present there?
- That Guru Amardas Ji was so uninvolved in his own household’s wedding that he was not even aware that his ਕੁੜਮ, or in-law, was Guru Angad Dev Ji. One of the most important and involved family members of a son’s wedding is the taiya. Yet, despite the fact that Guru Amardas Ji and his younger brother lived together (the brother’s son being the one who was betrothed to Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji’s daughter), we are supposed to believe that Sri Guru Amardas Ji did not meet the in-laws, or apparently even know whose family his nephew’s marriage had been arranged with.
- That Guru Amardas Ji’s family was not Sikh, and that Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji willingly gave his daughter’s hand in marriage to a non-Sikh. We are supposed to believe that Guru Amardas Ji’s nephew, Bhai Jasso (whom Bibi Amro Ji married) was not a Sikh, that his father (Guru Amardas Ji’s brother) was not a Sikh, and therefore Guru Amardas Ji was not a Sikh, and that he had no prior exposure or knowledge of Sikhi before the wedding.
- That Guru Amardas Ji, until that point, had been a “nigura”, a humiliatingly despicable term in Gurbani (ਨਿਗੁਰੇ ਕਾ ਹੈ ਨਾਉ ਬੁਰਾ).
- That Guru Amardas Ji was a Vaishnav despite the fact that the Bhallas were not even historically known to be a part of this religious sect.
Instead, it makes far more sense that Guru Amardas Ji had always been a Sikh - most likely having met and taken Guru-Deekhya from Guru Nanak Dev Ji in his early childhood, along with his entire family. Most likely, by the time Guru Angad Dev Ji had a daughter, it had already been decided that this daughter would be betrothed into this Gursikh family, thus why she was given the name Amro (to honour the pact of giving her into the family of Amardas).
Even if one were to reject the notion that Guru Amardas Ji had always been a Sikh, one cannot, given the contradictions, accept the Vaishnav narrative with any level of genuine integrity. The facts simply do not add up, but even more importantly, the narrative directly contradicts what Gurbani tells us about Guru Amardas Ji.
Let us first establish some theological principles regarding the nature of divinity of the Gurus:
- All Guru-Jammay are the same singular Guru-Joti and therefore all share the same guns, or qualities, of this Guru-Joti. One Guru cannot be less divine than any other, or lack any of the Guru-qualities, as they are all manifest forms of the same one Guru-Joti.
ਕਲਿਜੁਗਿਪ੍ਰਮਾਣੁਨਾਨਕਗੁਰੁਅੰਗਦੁਅਮਰੁਕਹਾਇਓ ॥
ਸ੍ਰੀਨਾਨਕਅੰਗਦਿਕਰਿਮਾਨਾ ॥ ਅਮਰਦਾਸਅੰਗਦਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥
ਅਮਰਦਾਸਰਾਮਦਾਸਕਹਾਯੋ ॥ ਸਾਧਨਿਲਖਾਮੂੜ੍ਹਨਹਿਪਾਯੋ ॥੯॥
ਭਿੰਨਭਿੰਨਸਭਹੂੰਕਰਜਾਨਾ ॥
ਏਕਰੂਪਕਿਨਹੂੰਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥
ਜਿਨਜਾਨਾਤਿਨਹੀਸਿਧਪਾਈ ॥
ਬਿਨਸਮਝਸਿਧਹਾਥਿਨਆਈ ॥੧੦॥
Just as Guru Gobind Singh Ji is accepted to have had absolute enlightenment even before ascending the throne of Gurgaddi officially, this same quality must accepted in regards to Guru Amardas Ji.
- Each Guru was born Brahmgyani, all-knowing and perfect. This principle, asserted in the following tuk referencing Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji, can be applied to all Guru Sahibaan equally:
ਤੈਜਨਮਤਗੁਰਮਤਿਬ੍ਰਹਮੁਪਛਾਣਿਓ ॥
We have already established that every divine quality of Guruship applies to each Gur-Avtaar equally. Therefore, Sri Guru Amardas Ji, too, would have to have been born with these qualities of Brahmgyan and perfect understanding of Gurmat, and could not have lived his entire life in ignorance.
- Each Guru manifested in the world as the Guru-Joti. The following Svaiye devoted to the third Patshah speak specifically of Naraiyan Vaheguru’s manifestation into the world directly as the form of Guru Amardas Ji:
ਆਪਿਨਰਾਇਣੁਕਲਾਧਾਰਿਜਗਮਹਿਪਰਵਰਿਯਉ ॥
ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰਿਆਕਾਰੁਜੋਤਿਜਗਮੰਡਲਿਕਰਿਯਉ ॥
Guru Amardas Ji is also acknowledged as being Satguru Joti from Aad (beginning of time), as per the following tuks:
ਸਤਜੁਗਿਤੈਮਾਣਿਓਛਲਿਓਬਲਿਬਾਵਨਭਾਇਓ ॥
ਤ੍ਰੇਤੈਤੈਮਾਣਿਓਰਾਮੁਰਘੁਵੰਸੁਕਹਾਇਓ ॥
ਦੁਆਪੁਰਿਕ੍ਰਿਸਨਮੁਰਾਰਿਕੰਸੁਕਿਰਤਾਰਥੁਕੀਓ ॥
ਉਗ੍ਰਸੈਣਕਉਰਾਜੁਅਭੈਭਗਤਹਜਨਦੀਓ ॥
ਕਲਿਜੁਗਿਪ੍ਰਮਾਣੁਨਾਨਕਗੁਰੁਅੰਗਦੁਅਮਰੁਕਹਾਇਓ ॥
ਸ੍ਰੀਗੁਰੂਰਾਜੁਅਬਿਚਲੁਅਟਲੁਆਦਿਪੁਰਖਿਫੁਰਮਾਇਓ ॥੭॥
This further reinforces the principle truth that Sri Guru Amardas Ji was born perfect, all-knowing, and incapable of ignorance or falsehood.
It is clear that, according to Gurbani, Guru Amardas Ji was the direct manifestation of Akal Purakh, born as antarjami with absolutely no capability of ignorance. His coming into the world was no less of a perfect, divine event than the coming of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and his life was no less divine either. We must accept this according to the very principles of Guru-divinity laid out in Gurbani. Thus, even from just a theological Gurmat standpoint, we must accept that the “nigura Vaishnav narrative” is false.
Any Sakhi that fails under the scrutiny of Gurmat principles must be accepted as being mere folktale. The writers of these stories were not first-hand witnesses. They simply recorded the testimonies of others from wherever they could get them, and did the important work of writing everything down indiscriminately. However, they have left it to us to filter through these stories with the understanding that human testimony can be imperfect. Unlike Gurbani, these texts are not infallible doctrine.
Often in the Sikh community, the preservation of folktale is prioritized over historical authenticity, logic, and Gurmat. This has similarly happened with the propagation of the Bhai Lehna Ji origin story, which makes Guru Angad Dev Ji into a supposed Durga-worshipper despite the fact that Bhai Lehna Ji’s family and caretakers were verifiable devotees of Guru Nanak Dev Ji and that it is historically accepted that the Pehle Patshah visited the varied residences of Bhai Lehna Ji several times over the course of many years. This narrative gained universal acceptance despite its inconsistencies and clashes with Gurmat principles.
There is a source that we can go to for first-hand, unadultered historical testimony, and that is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Besides the direct writings of the Gurus, it contains the direct accounts of the contemporaries of the Guru’s Darbar. The Bhatts wrote openly of the eternal divine qualities of Sri Guru Amardas Ji, never once hinting at a Vaishnav background or a history of ignorance, and instead proclaiming that Guru Amardas Ji had borne the enlightened state since the start of time. This is the litnus against which all other narratives must be measured.
It is time to put the sacrilegious “nigura Vaishnav” story to rest.
