Talk:Zorawar Singh (Sikhism)

Untitled
does 'bricked alive' mean they were hit with bricks, or encased, alive, in a newly built brick structure? Shabbychef (talk) 21:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

NOPAGE
, do we need a separate page for Zorawar Singh (Sikhism) and Fateh Singh (Sikhism) (both will have same content; 100%) or shall we just merge this to Gobind Singh and redirect the two articles? TrangaBellam (talk) 20:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't know enough about this topic. But I would say it is not reasonable to have more than a line or two about any relative in a biography page (of Gobind Singh in this case). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * What do you feel? I think a merge will be decent outcome since all sources cover the incident while describing Gobind Singh's conflict with the Mughals. The sources that are in the page does not even mention our subject by name, choosing to use "Gobind Singh's son"! TrangaBellam (talk) 05:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Where a reasonable target exists, I generally support merging; not only do we cut back on redundant material, it's centralizing the information, so anyone interested in the topic has to read fewer articles. But I'm not well-versed enough in this subject to know whether this could be a viable page at some point. As it stands, I would support a merge/redirect. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:56, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I would say yes as you said the sources doesn't even mention their names, so a separate article for them might not be warranted but perhaps a "Sons of Guru Gobind Singh" collectively if there is GNG for that topic. Altho I'm unaware of the topic in broad, based on your arguments, I agree with merging them. If and when there is scholarship on their lives outside the conflict, the articles could be revived. Have you read thru the sources in Jujhar Singh, another son? That stub could be merged as well — DaxServer (t · m · c) 09:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * V93, I agree with the need of centralization of information. Daxserver, your proposal about a page concerning Sons of Guru Gobind Singh is very interesting and as of now, I am favorably inclined! You won't see scholarship on their lives "outside the conflict" since we are discussing pre-teen boys (our subject was only seven years old!) whose sole claim to fame laid in being "unethically" executed by the Mughals amidst their conflict with Gobind Singh. For now, I am trying to find out if some scholar has probed into the changing narratives concerning the execution of our subject. TrangaBellam (talk) 10:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * So, I went through J.S. Grewal's biography of Gobind Singh and am certain, that maintaining standalone articles on any of the son is impossible. Will merge to Gobind Singh citing this discussion; till then, the current version of the article is decent enough. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:32, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Changing narratives about the execution

 * Grewal notes that Sainapati was the only contemporary chronicler of Singh's maneuvers in Anandapur and Chamkaur. Kulwant Singh's translation of the relevant verses go:
 * The enemy forces which remained on the battlefield,
 * Unitedly did they launch an attack on Chamkaur fortress.
 * There taking the (two) Sahibzadas into captivity,
 * Together did they bring the Sahibzadas to Sirhind.
 * As Sahibzada Jujhar Singh had put up a mighty fight,
 * Death’s messengers hovered around him
 * Such being the divine dispensation of the Divine Lord,
 * That both the Sahibzadas departed for heavens.
 * Praise, great praise be to the Guru’s sons,
 * That never did they care for saving their lives.
 * Their religious faith did they uphold in this dark age,
 * Worthy did they become of their grand father’s blessings.
 * So did Sahibzada Fateh Singh and Jujhar Singh,
 * Shed their mortal frames in supreme sacrifice.
 * Note that Sainapati claims Jujhar Singh (not Zorowar Singh) to have been executed at Sirhind. Further, he does not offer any detail on the execution either.
 * Kulwant Singh, who is evidently lacking training in the discipline of history, offers his commentary: TrangaBellam (talk) 08:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Koer Singh's Gurbilas [1751] accuses Sucha Nanad of being the one to suggest the execution; the Nawab of Meherkotla had dissented. Notes that the saahibzaade were entombed alive !
 * Kesar Singh Chhibber, a Sikh Brahmin and a spirited defender of the caste system, wrote Bansāvalī-nāmā Dasān Pātshāhīān Kā in 1769. His family was involved in the retinue of multiple Gurus; yet, he played an insignificant role in Sikh affairs owing to the rise of Khalsa and wrote the text, probably as a resentment. Chibber casts the entire blame upon Sucha Nand — described as a relative of the Sahi Khatris of Lahore — for instigating Khan into executing the saahibzaade. The method of execution is not described . It may be noted that Chibber had raging animosity against the Khatris, held them as only worthy of being servants to Brahmins, and accused them (esp. the Sahi Khatris of Lahore) for colloborating with the Mughals against Sikh gurus on multiple occassions.
 * Sarup Das Bhalla, a Sikh's account of the episode is found from Mahima Prakash [1776]. The Nawab of Meherkotla was opposed to punishing them but Sucha Nand egged Khan on, since the saahibzaade were "enemies of the state". Ultimately, Khan had them beheaded after they refused to salute him.
 * Sukha Singh’s Gurbilas Patshahi Dasvin [1797] is the first account to mention of the betrayal by a greedy Brahmin as the reason of the saahibzaade being imprisoned at the first place. Otherwise, provides the same details as Bhalla (just above). Adds that Sucha Nand had characterized them as offsprings of a cobra, carrying venom from "head to toe". TrangaBellam (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)