My Favorite Author : Response to J.S. Tiwana

Introduction

My Favourite Author

- Baldev Singh

For the benefit of the readers I am reproducing here Mr. Jagpal Singh Tiwana’s article (http://home.istar.ca/~cye/articles.html) as an introduction:

Dr. H.W. McLeod is my favorite author on Sikh history; in fact, he is primarily responsible for my interest in the subject. Before reading McLeod, my knowledge of Sikh history was only what I had learned from my dharmic (religious) teacher at B.N. Khalsa High School, Patiala, or what I heard at home and in the gurdwaras. His books provoked me to read more on the subject.

In the early seventies, I read his name for the first time in the Choice magazine, as the author of “Guru Nanak and Sikh Religion.” Choice is an organ of the American Library Association. It reviews books for academic libraries. Libraries select any book recommended by Choice with no hesitation. Thus, his book came highly recommended. I ordered one copy for our college library, and one copy for my personal use. It is indeed a scholarly work. The best part concentrated upon the teachings of Guru Nanak. Guru Nanak Dev University had the teachings translated into Punjabi and published it as “Guru Nanak da Updesh.”

Then, in 1976, came McLeod’s second book, “The Evolution of the Sikh Community.” Overall, I enjoyed the book, but could not easily digest some of the new ideas it presented. McLeod puts a question mark on traditional concepts which are not supported by documents. He does not reject them, but only says they need more research. However, a mind nurtured on centuries old traditions cannot easily accept a question mark. Even now, it takes me a week or so to appreciate his ideas which question the traditional approach after churning over them many times. I wrote a review of “The Evolution of the Sikh Community” which was published in The Canadian India Times on March 2, 1978. When I read that review now, it looks so childish and simplistic.

We invited McLeod to Halifax in 1992 as a guest of the Maritime Sikh Society. He delivered a public lecture, “The Sikh Struggle in the Eighteenth Century and its Relevance Today” at the International Centre, Saint Mary’s University and he gave a talk in our Gurdwara on “Sikhs in New Zealand.” He then attended a reception in his honor in a restaurant in the evening. Every body was deeply impressed by his friendly, unassuming and modest nature. If he is brilliant as a scholar, he is equally decent as a human being with no ill will or animosity towards his critics.

Within a few weeks after he left Halifax, Dr. Pashaura Singh’s thesis came out. A flood of criticism rose against McLeod from a section of Sikh writers, since he was the supervisor of Pashaura Singh. I must admit I developed some doubts about McLeod’s research motives. I, myself, started believing that he was a Christian missionary who wanted to damage Sikh faith in order to convert Sikhs to Christianity.

In 1994, I visited India to attend the wedding of my nephew. I took this opportunity to talk to the following Sikh scholars on McLeod’s approach:

1. Prof. Pritam Singh, former head of Dept. of Punjabi, Mahendra College, Patiala

2. Prof. Harbans Singh, Editor, Encylopedia of Sikhism

3. Dr. J.S. Grewal, former Vice Chancellor GND and former Director of Indian Institute of Advanced Studies

4. Principal Sant Singh Sekhon

All of them said, without hesitation, that McLeod is an honest scholar. He has absolutely no motive to malign Sikhs. This was also the view of S. Khushwant Singh when I met him in February 2003.

I was also advised to check the qualifications of people who were criticizing McLeod. There are always some good and some bad points in the works of every scholar. Those who focus merely on the negatives are biased and less than honest.

Prof. Pritam Singh was my main source. He told me that when McLeod was working on his doctorate on Guru Nanak, he came several times to interview his next door neighbor, the celebrated historian, Dr. Ganda Singh, and also interviewed him (Pritam Singh). Dr. Ganda Singh found McLeod absolutely sincere and earnest. Pritam Singh said that as long as Ganda Singh was alive, his critics did not have the courage to attack McLeod. Ganda Singh stood too tall and well respected in the profession. He wrote an article in defense of McLeod in a journal, The Punjab, Past and Present, which he edited. It was a befitting reply to some critics of McLeod. Later I obtained a copy of the article; perhaps I may still have it. Who knows better how to read research and write history than Ganda Singh?

Harbans Singh has included several well-researched articles of McLeod in Encyclopedia Sikhism. A scholar who comes recommended by such fine minds as Ganda Singh, Harbans Singh, Khushwant Singh, and J.S. Grewal has to be accepted and respected. I made my decision.

I had my first lesson in history from my history Professor, S. Kartar Singh Shergill. I once said to him that Pundit Nehru says so about Babur in his book, Discovery of India. He shot back at me, “Nehru is not a historian. Read Panikar or Majumdar.” He said that like any discipline, history is a specialized field. A historian is properly trained to conduct research. Historians take pride in their qualifications. If a historian cannot write with authority on physiology, botany, or geography, the same is true in the field of history for others.

Now whenever I am asked to read a book on Sikh history by a critic of McLeod, I always check the qualifications of the author and compare his standing in the profession with Ganda Singh and others mentioned above. I then form my view accordingly. I also check the publisher of his books, if he has written any. Such famous publishing houses as Oxford, Princeton and Cambridge Universities have published the works of McLeod, Khushwant Singh and J.S. Grewal.

Do I accept wholeheartedly everything McLeod writes? Certainly not, especially in the area of Sikh scriptures. He lacks proper qualifications here. If his interpretation of Gurbani clashes with that of Sahib Singh, Jodh Singh, Gurinder Mann or Pashaura Singh, I will accept the Sikh scholars’ views.

As I mentioned earlier, McLeod has been accused of being a Christian missionary who came to Punjab to destroy Sikhism in order to promote Christianity in its place. No one ever cared to find what kind of missionary work he actually did, though his critics claim to be better informed. When this kind of character assassination was in full swing in the early Nineties, Dr. I.J. Singh of New York asked McLeod to clarify his position. This he did in an article in the Sikh Review.

McLeod did come to Punjab as missionary of a church in New Zealand, but soon his interest in religion started to wane. As a trained historian, he found history of Sikhs very fascinating. He taught Punjab history at Baring College, Batala, spent his extra time learning the Punjabi language, and then did his Ph.D. on Guru Nanak from London University. He left the college, and lost all interest and contact with the church. After this explanation, some responsible critics stopped repeating the missionary charge.

If McLeod had any motive for destroying Sikhism, he would have readily accepted that Guru Nanak was the chela (disciple) of Kabir as given in most of the works of Western writers. He not only rejects this view, but rather doubts whether Kabir and Guru Nanak had ever met. He does not believe that Guru Gobind Singh ever worshipped goddess Durga, and doubts if the Chandi Charitr, an obscene part in Dasam Granth, is the composition of Guru Gobind Singh. His book, Sikhism (1997), is full of complimentary passages on Sikhs.

Lately, McLeod is getting acceptance from his open-minded detractors. His support as an expert in the court cases on turban and kirpan issues in Canada won him appreciation from many, especially the World Sikh Organization (Canada). His book, Textual Sources for the study of Sikhism, has won him laurels from all directions.

He has admirers in New Zealand for tracing their roots in his books. About a year back when some friends started bashing McLeod here on Sikh Diaspora forum, Navtej Randhawa from New Zealand came swinging in his defense. He wrote “I am a fourth generation Punjabi Sikh New Zealander here in New Zealand and I can assure you that if it wasn't for Dr W.H Mcleod's (not sure if he is related to Dr Hew Mcleod) rather legendary research work on our Sikh community here in New Zealand, I would have never known about our early punjabi heritage in New Zealand. Some of the historical facts are so fascinating that we are just startled by the details. Now I can very easily refer to some concrete data and collections from his books 'Punjabis in New Zealand' and 'Sikh Migration to New Zealand'. My Grandad and Greatgrandad worked with him on these projects and grandad tells me that if it wasn't for this scholar we would have lost a very valuable piece of history from our heritage.” (Missive #3155)

The younger generation of Sikh scholars such as Gurinder Mann, Jeevan Singh Deol, Pashaura Singh, Nikki Guninder, Harjot Oberoi, I.J. Singh hold McLeod in high esteem.

He is the most quoted author on Sikhism today. After Ganda Singh, he is indeed the Baba Bohar (huge tree) of Sikh history.

ANALYSIS:

Notwithstanding what J.S. Grewal, Sant Singh Sekhon, Pritam Singh, Khushwant Singh, Gurinder Singh Mann, Jeevan Singh Deol, Pashaura Singh, Nikki Guninder Kaur Singh, Harjot Oberoi and I. J. Singh told Tiwana about McLeod, let us examine how W.H. McLeod got his PhD on Sikhism and became “one of the foremost scholars of Sikh studies in the world,” his credentials as a historian and his ethics in McLeod‘s own words.

CONTENTS

Chapter 1 How McLeod became “one of the foremost scholars” of Sikh Studies?

Chapter 2 McLeod’s Credentials as a Historian

Chapter 3 McLeod’s Ethics, Part I

Chapter 4 McLeod’s Ethics, Part II

Chapter 5 What Ganda Singh and Harbans Singh thought of McLeod?

Conclusion How does McLeod defend his work?

Home | Table of Contents | Next Chapter

Print this Article Email this Article Comment on this Article