In all that has preceded we have confined ourselves strictly to the intimate relationship subsisting between early Sikhism and the Muḥammadan religion. It is, however, needful to allude to the fact that certain surviving relics of Buddhism had no small share in moulding the thoughts of the Founder of the Sikh religion. A full examination of this part of the subject would be out of place in the present work. It must suffice to say that Buddhism held its position in the Panjāb long after it had disappeared from other parts of Northern India; and the abundance of Buddhistic relics, which are continually being unearthed in the district, prove the wide-spread and long-continued influence of the tenets of the gentle-hearted Buddha. Indications of this influence on early Sikhism are seen in its freedom from caste, in the respect for animal life, the special form of metempsychosis accepted, the importance ascribed to meditation, the profuse charity, the reverence paid to the seat of the Guru (like the Buddhistic worship of the throne), Nānak’s respect for the lotos, his missionary tours, and the curious union subsisting between the Guru and his Sangat. In the Travels of Guru Tegh Bahādur, translated from the original Gurmukhī by an excellent scholar, Sirdār Atar Singh, we find the following remarkable sentence: “The Guru and his Sangat are like the warp and woof in cloth,—there is no difference between them” (p. 37). In the Ādi Granth there is an entire Sukhmanī, or poem, by Guru Arjun, wholly devoted to a recitation of the advantages of “the society of the pious,” the term employed being, however, in this case, sādh kai sang. (I. O. MS. 2484, fol. 134.) In addition to these points of resemblance, there is found in early Sikhism a curious veneration for trees, offerings to which were sometimes made, as will be seen by reference to pp. 67, 70, and 83, of the Travels of Guru Tegh Bahādur, just cited. In precise conformity with the tradition that Buddha died under a Sāl tree, we have seen that Nānak purposely breathed his last under a Sarīh tree. Anyone familiar with Buddhism will readily recognize the remarkable coincidences stated above; but the most conclusive of all is the positive inculcation of views identical with the crowning doctrine of Buddhism—the Nirvāna itself. The following is what Dr. Trumpp says on the subject:—
“If there could be any doubt on the pantheistic character of the tenets of the Sikh Gurus regarding the Supreme, it would be dissolved by their doctrine of the Nirbān. Where no personal God is taught or believed in, man cannot aspire to a final personal communion with him, his aim can only be absorption in the Absolute Substance, i.e. individual annihilation. We find, therefore, no allusion to the joys of a future life in the Granth, as heaven or paradise, though supposed to exist, is not considered a desirable object. The immortality of the soul is only taught so far as the doctrine of transmigration requires it; but when the soul has reached its highest object, it is no more mentioned, because it no longer exists as individual soul.
“The Nirbān, as is well known, is the grand object which Buddha in his preaching held out to the poor people. From his atheistic point of view, he could look out for nothing else; personal existence, with all the concomitant evils of this life, which are not counterbalanced by corresponding pleasures, necessarily appeared to him as the greatest evil. His whole aim was, therefore, to counteract the troubles and pain of this existence by a stoical indifference to pleasure and pain, and to stop individual consciousness to its utmost limit, in order to escape at the point of death from the dreaded transmigration, which he also, even on his atheistic ground, had not ventured to reject. Buddhism is, therefore, in reality, like Sikhism, nothing but unrestricted Pessimism, unable to hold out to man any solace, except that of annihilation.
“In progress of time, Buddhism has been expelled from India, but the restored Brahmanism, with its confused cosmological legends, and gorgeous mythology of the Purānas, was equally unable to satisfy the thinking minds. It is, therefore, very remarkable, that Buddhism in its highest object, the Nirbān, soon emerges again in the popular teachings of the mediæval reformatory movements. Nāmdev, Trilochan, Kabīr, Ravidās, &c., and after these Nānak, take upon themselves to show the way to the Nirbān, as Buddha in his time had promised, and find eager listeners; the difference is only in the means which these Bhagats [saints] propose for obtaining the desired end.” (Introduction to Translation of the Ādi Granth, p. cvi.)
Such, then, was the Sikh religion as founded by Guru Nānak. It is based on Hindūism, modified by Buddhism, and stirred into new life by Ṣūfīism. There seems to be superabundant evidence that Nānak laboured earnestly to reconcile Hindūism with Muḥammadanism, by insisting strongly on the tenets on which both parties could agree, and by subordinating the points of difference. It is impossible to deny that Nānak in his life-time actually did effect a large amount of reconciliation, and left behind him a system designed to carry on the good work. The circumstances which led to the entire reversal of the project, and produced between Muḥammadans and Sikhs the deadliest of feuds, does not come within the purview of the present article. It is enough to state that the process was gradual, and was as much due to political causes as to a steady departure from the teachings of the Founder of Sikhism.
The Sikhs acknowledge ten Gurus, whose names, with the year in which each died, are given in the following list:—
| Name. | Date of Death. | Duration of Guru-ship. |
| A.D. | Years. | |
| Guru Nānak | 1538 | 34 |
| Guru Angad | 1552 | 14 |
| Guru Amar-Dās | 1574 | 22 |
| Guru Rām-Dās | 1581 | 7 |
| Guru Arjun | 1606 | 25 |
| Guru Har-Govind | 1638 | 32 |
| Guru Har-Rāˏī | 1660 | 22 |
| Guru Har-Krishan | 1664 | 4 |
| Guru Tegh-Bahādur | 1675 | 11 |
| Guru Govind Singh | 1708 | 33 |
It is thus seen that the Sikh fraternity was under the guidance of personal Gurus from A.D. 1504, when Nānak received the spiritual impulse which gave birth to the new sect, until A.D. 1708, a total period of 204 years. After the death of Guru Govind Singh, the Ādi Granth itself was taken to be the ever-existing impersonal guide.
The first successor of Nānak was appointed on account of his devotion to the cause. Shortly after the supposed visit to Makkah, Nānak met with a devotee named Lahanā, whose faith and earnestness were so fully demonstrated that Nānak named him, in preference to either of his sons, as his successor in the leadership of the new sect. His name was also changed from Lahanā to Angad (= anga-da, “body-giving”), implying that he was willing to give his very body to the cause of God. He was a poor and ignorant man, and maintained himself by rope-making. He is said to have heard the whole account of Nānak’s life from Bhāˏī Bālā, who had long been with the Founder. It is related that all the counsel which Nānak had given to the Sikhs was sedulously inculcated by him. (Sikhān de Rāj dī Vithiˏā, p. 19.) Like his predecessor, the Founder, he also named as his successor a devoted servant; although he had sons whom he might have appointed.
Amar-Dās, the third Guru, was a simple-minded and inoffensive man, who was as unlearned as his two predecessors; nevertheless, he composed several verses incorporated in the Ādi Granth. It was in his time that we hear of the first differences between the Sikhs and the Muḥammadans. The gentle disposition of Amar-Dās was unsuited to the position of ruler among the strong-willed people of the Panjāb; accordingly, when a difference occurred, he was quite incapable of settling the matter. It is related that Amar-Dās was completely absorbed in the service of Paramesur (God). (Sikhān de Rāj dī Vithiˏā, p. 25.) The use of this word indicates a marked inclination towards the Hindū side of Sikhism; and we may suppose that such an inclination would be resented by the firmer adherents to Islām; for we find that the Muslims began to annoy this Guru’s disciples by trivial acts of aggression. The disciples asked their Guru what they had better do; and he suggested various temporising expedients, which only emboldened the aggressors. When again appealed to, he desired his disciples to endure the wrong, as it was more meritorious to submit than to resent an insult. The weak conduct of this Guru left a legacy of ill-will for his successors to deal with. Amar-Dās nominated his son-in-law as his successor; an example which initiated the hereditary Guru-ship which followed.