“The arming of the Panth could not have been the result of any decision by Guru Hargobind, but because of Jat influx in the Sikh fold…….

LOL…. what a farce.. Can’t believe he calls himself a historian….arming of jatts is due to KHalsa and coz of Guru sahib not the other way around. IF it was true..how come muslims flattened the Punjabi Jatt *** from 13th century till about the rise of Khalsa? This organization should be banned…

but singhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, centenial foundation members are educated professionalsss

There should be an organized boycott by youth against these “Elitists”

They didn’t seriously honour Bolan and KP Gill did they???

t, they educated fools still

Go to university, study history (or anything non eng/math/sci), and then comment. Seriously.

I’m not saying all McLeod says is correct or that I agree with it. He’s not out to get the Sikhs, he just says it like he see’s it. He’s bound to make mistakes. This is how academia works. If you want to argue his *historical* accounts, use *historical* arguements. Not “this is what my daddy taught me.”

And what’s with brushing off anyone educated a “professional”/elitist? Honestly, grow up. They went to school. Maybe they learned something. Trying to discredit them by calling them educated is hardly an effective strategy.

An interesting article titled: Psychoanalysis of Dr. W. H. McLeod Based on “Discovering The Sikhs—Autobiography of A Historian” By Dr. S. S. Sodhi and Dr.J.S.Mann can be found here -

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/pdf/Journal/psychoanalysis%20of%20DrMcleod.PDF

But keep in mind the violence inflicted upon the Sikh identity does not stop with McLeod, his work has laid the foundation for Harjot Oberoi of UBC and Doris Jakobsh of Waterloo. Jakobsh goes as far as to argue in her dissertation that Sikh women were never intended to take Amrit, Khanda Ke Pahul – that of Guru Gobind Singh Jee’s Khalsa rather were only permitted to take Charan Pahul – therefore declaring Khanda Ke Pahul as being exclusively for men and consequently the non-biased initiation which is practiced today as being a contemporary phenomenon. Therefore according to Jakobsh one can conclude women who currently adorn the sign and insignia of Guru Gobind Singh Jee’s Khalsa are merely a postmodernist construct rather than the authentic intention of the Guru. This claim is difficult to believe considering historical accounts of 1699 which place women alongside men and the prominent gender progressive Sikh theology of the time, yet Jakobsh was able to obtain her credentials since McLeod’s misrepresentation has built up a veil of illusion which has also obstructed the vision of Oberoi and his work.

- Kamalpreet Kaur

Educated Professional

Going to school can make you an editor of a newspaper…but not a sikh historian… you need to do kamai and have faith…and they are both anti academia..end of discussion

“Educated Professional”

Unfortunately you have gone against your own advice, my remarks against the foundation being an elitist group is based on a so called educated perspective. I suggest you take some time to study the topic of social justice, which takes into consideration the models of society in which the rich power elite who are actually a minority will basically sell their souls to remain on top and gain a sense of prestige and superiority.

If social justice doesn’t float your boat, how about liberation theology?

According to your educated professional model, your probably content and happy with President Bush running your country based on his elitist PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, which preaches how to make money and remain powerful, while exploiting the weak, after all its simple economics something you would learn at any Business School.

When it comes down to it, the only true education and source for enlightenment for a Sikh is the word of the Guru, which fortunately goes hand in hand far more easily with social justice and peace studies and liberation theology, than an Ivey League Business School.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Amneezy has killed it.. Peace

Random Taksali,
Kamai and faith (not blind faith btw) take you to maharaj and that is wicked. They do not, however, make you a historian.

Amneezy,
You cannot say that I’m going against my own advice because of my response to your one line statement that anyone would take merely as an unjustified attack on a group of people. If you had meant something different, you should have better articulated yourself in the firstplace.

Also, when did I present an “educated professional” model? Did I say the only people that matter are those that are educated? Did I says I support Bush? Stop it. Stop putting words in my mouth.

All I said was that if you want to attack Mcleod’s historical findings and conclusions, you have to do it from an academic perspective. Heresay and oral tradition is pretty useless in academia, and for good reason. If it wasn’t, academic journals would be no different from online forums like the one we’re arguing on right now.

“When it comes down to it, the only true education and source for enlightenment for a Sikh is the word of the Guru” - I agree 100%. Gurbani will take us to our guru, but it unfortunately did not record our history.

“goes hand in hand far more easily with social justice and peace studies and liberation theology” - This has less to do with our history and more to do with our social ideals. In any case, it is a whole other debate I’d rather not get into.

son..you need blind faith in God.. mercy

Blind Faith is fine as long as a person whom the faith depends upon is not blind…

Ez

“Kamai and faith (not blind faith btw) take you to maharaj and that is wicked”

Apparantly this guy thinks Bramginianz dont know history… buddy… if you reach maharaj.. you KNOW stuff than making guesses…

you been listening to ghagga too much dude.. make sure you read Nitnem banis..including 3 Amrit banis from Sri Guru Dasam Granth Sahib ji as well..

Mercy

“Did I say the only people that matter are those that are educated?”

Educated Professional responds to himself -

“Go to university, study history (or anything non eng/math/sci), and then comment. Seriously.”

“All I said was that if you want to attack Mcleod’s historical findings and conclusions, you have to do it from an academic perspective. Heresay and oral tradition is pretty useless in academia, and for good reason. If it wasn’t, academic journals would be no different from online forums like the one we’re arguing on right now.”

and like I said trying looking at it from the perspective of Social Justice and Peace Studies, or as Taksali Singh and myself have agreed on … Liberation Theology with a foundation in Sikhi.

“Gurbani will take us to our guru, but it unfortunately did not record our history.

…This has less to do with our history and more to do with our social ideals. In any case, it is a whole other debate I’d rather not get into.”

Its quite unfortunate that you think Guru Ji`s historical progression would be contradictory to Guru Ji`s social ideals. Mcleods writings speak against Guru Ji in Guru Ji`s time, if you really believe the history of the Gurus can be different from what they preached, then that might be a problem… I on the other hand do not believe Guru Ji`s is hypocrite, and think what was preached in Bani is what was followed by Guru Ji.

Also, many religions have recorded their scriptures from oral tradition including the Hindu Scriptures(which I would assume you would see nothing wrong with doubting). Gurbani from my understanding also has its roots in oral tradition.

Regardless, again according to your reasoning don`t you think that Suraj Parkash Granth and Janamsakhis would be more accurate than Mcleod considering they were written much earlier giving less room for inaccurate information or manipulation in the progression of time. I wouldn`t be surprised if Mcleod has ignored these sources and drawn conclusions himself. Its unfortunate other so called Academics have sourced Mcleods work rather than the works mentioned above, or even the writings of the Mughals. I find it highly suspicious that these academics allow such a great bias in using information that is inconsistent with many credible sources of knowledge.

The point is why is the foundation honouring individuals like this, who have written things that clearly hurt the sentiments of a large majority of the Panth. How can the foundation label themselves a SIKH organization and then have ticket prices that most of the sangat cannot afford, only the rich elite. Sikh events should never be exclusive or have any affiliation to class or socioeconomic status. The Foundation has began a what i perceive as being as elitist organization giving rise to a class division within our society, and whether you want to acknowledge it or not, this should be affiliated with Sikhi in any way.

Sikhi promotes social justice and peace initiatives and liberation theology and the Foundations actions have clearly gone against the teachings of both.

Individuals should be honoured in Guru Ji`s Darbar and with the blessing of the Sangat, not the blessing of RICH elite sangat, because when it comes down to it the Rich Elite are a minority.

So I propose the question of how and why the Foundation is or can claim to be a Sikh organization…

ding ding ding… Amneezy wins another round

Amneezy, you are quoting me out context.

First I said ““Go to university, study history (or anything non eng/math/sci), and then comment.” Reading my statement in the progression of the posts, I think it’s obvious I was telling people to save judgement on mcleod’s academic findings unless they can attack his findings in an appropriate mannor.

Second, “Did I say the only people that matter are those that are educated?” was in response to the “educated professional model” that you put in my mouth, suggesting that only educated people are important in society.

Please, this is no way to argue.

“and like I said trying looking at it from the perspective of Social Justice and Peace Studies, or as Taksali Singh and myself have agreed on … Liberation Theology with a foundation in Sikhi.” - again, you’re trying to argue social theory. I never brought it up, I don’t know why you’re so hell bent on it.

“Its quite unfortunate that you think Guru Ji`s historical progression would be contradictory to Guru Ji`s social ideals. Mcleods writings speak against Guru Ji in Guru Ji`s time, if you really believe the history of the Gurus can be different from what they preached, then that might be a problem… I on the other hand do not believe Guru Ji`s is hypocrite, and think what was preached in Bani is what was followed by Guru Ji.” — Again, you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said I believe “Guru Ji`s historical progression is contradictory to Guru Ji`s social ideals.” In fact, I specifically said I do not agree with everything mcleod says. For the third time now… all I have been saying is that to attack mcleod’s findings properly, you need to do it properly, academically.

Also, if you have actually read anything by mcleod (and this means more than the excepts shinda buts on his blog), you would know that mcleod does talk about the janam sakhian, suraj parkash, and many other granths. And the fact that you brought this up also leads me to believe you yourself have no idea what is contained in these granths since a great deal of it goes against DDT beliefs and would thus, I assume, be discounted by adherents of DDT.

“The point is why is the foundation honouring individuals like this, who have written things that clearly hurt the sentiments of a large majority of the Panth.” — Maybe the organisers have read his work and decided he’s not out to get the sikhs. Maybe they have come to the conclusion that while his work may contain errors (like all historical accounts), he has also done a lot to flesh out sikh history. Or.. maybe they just wanted a big name. All I’m saying is that just because some people don’t like him, doesn’t mean he should not have been honoured.

“How can the foundation label themselves a SIKH organization and then have ticket prices that most of the sangat cannot afford, only the rich elite.” I see your point here, and must say I am somewhat torn on my opinion. On the one hand it is isolating a segment of the sikh population. On the other hand, these events do cost a lot of money to put together. I highly doubt the fountation is making money off them. Also, I think events like this are important so that we can better integrate with elements outside our community. Finally, it’s not a kirtan/langar program. It’s more social than spiritual.

In any case, I feel this has gone on long enough, so this will be my last post on the matter. I welcome you to submit a closing comment if you like.

btw, Random Taksali. While you’re comments are true (for the most part), they have not application to this debate. For this reason, I have not replied to them. ‘mercy son’

“and like I said trying looking at it from the perspective of Social Justice and Peace Studies, or as Taksali Singh and myself have agreed on … Liberation Theology with a foundation in Sikhi.” –Again, this is social theory.. I never brought it up, I’m not sure why you’re so hell bent on it.

“Its quite unfortunate that you think Guru Ji`s historical progression would be contradictory to Guru Ji`s social ideals. Mcleods writings speak against Guru Ji in Guru Ji`s time, if you really believe the history of the Gurus can be different from what they preached, then that might be a problem… I on the other hand do not believe Guru Ji`s is hypocrite” — Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I never said I think “Guru Ji`s historical progression is contradictory to Guru Ji`s social ideals.” I never said the history of the gurus is different from what they preached. In fact I explicitly said I don’t agree with everything mcleod says. For the third time, all I’ve been arguing is that in order refute mcleod’s findings, it must be done properly from an academic perspecive.

“don`t you think that Suraj Parkash Granth and Janamsakhis would be more accurate than Mcleod considering they were written much earlier giving less room for inaccurate information or manipulation in the progression of time.” — Generally, yes.

“I wouldn`t be surprised if Mcleod has ignored these sources and drawn conclusions himself.” –Thank you for highlighting my point. Of course he didn’t draw conclusions out of nothing, because that’s not how academia works. Quite the opposite, thats usually how people argue outside of academia

If you would read more mcleod than the excepts shinda posts on his blog, you would know mcleod takes into accoutn the janam sakhian, suraj parkash, and many other granths. Also, the fact that you brought up these sources leads me to believe that you know very little about them as a lot of their contents actually go against ddt beliefs and I would assume thus be discounted by the ddt crowd.

“The point is why is the foundation honouring individuals like this, who have written things that clearly hurt the sentiments of a large majority of the Panth.” — this is a matter of opinion. some people think mcleod is a demon out to discredit sikhi. others believe that he is an unbiased reseacher, looking from the outside in, who’s bound to make mistakes but has also done a lot to flesh out sikh history.

“How can the foundation label themselves a SIKH organization and then have ticket prices that most of the sangat cannot afford” — My opinion on this matter is torn. Yes, Sikh organisations should strive to make their events open to all. However, events like this are not cheap, and I highly doubt the foundation was out to make money. Also, I think events like this are important so that we can have contact with various elements outside our community. And yes, that also includes the ‘elite’ outside our community. Finally, this wasn’t a kirtan/langar program, it was a social event.

In any case, I feel this arguement has gone on long enough. As such, this will be my last entry. I welcome you to post a closing comment as well if you wish.

btw, Random Taksali. While your comments are true (for the most part), they are not applicable to this debate. For this reason I have not responded to them. ‘mercy son’

“The point is why is the foundation honouring individuals like this, who have written things that clearly hurt the sentiments of a large majority of the Panth.” — this is a matter of opinion. some people think mcleod is a demon out to discredit sikhi. others believe that he is an unbiased reseacher, looking from the outside in, who’s bound to make mistakes but has also done a lot to flesh out sikh history.

“How can the foundation label themselves a SIKH organization and then have ticket prices that most of the sangat cannot afford” — My opinion on this matter is torn. Yes, Sikh organisations should strive to make their events open to all. However, events like this are not cheap, and I highly doubt the foundation was out to make money. Also, I think events like this are important so that we can have contact with various elements outside our community. And yes, that also includes the ‘elite’ outside our community. Finally, this wasn’t a kirtan/langar program, it was a social event.

In any case, I feel this arguement has gone on long enough. As such, this will be my last entry. I welcome you to post a closing comment as well if you wish.

btw, Random Taksali. While your comments are true (for the most part), they are not applicable to this debate. For this reason I have not responded to them. ‘mercy son’

educated professional, I’ve read some of mcleod’s work. For example, his Jatt hypothesis, I’ve read elsewhere is just a hypothesis that is not based on historical fact. I’ve also read that Mcleod himself admitted this and said that he wanted to put an alternative opinion out there. Putting other POV out there (which gets a person published), that happen to not be based on historical evidence, is pretty dishonest in my opinion. At the very least, in his writing, he could have stated that he wasn’t basing it on historical fact, but that it was just a hypothesis put out there for a different POV - it might not have been so bad otherwise.

I don’t personally believe that he’s intentionally anti-panthic, but I do believe that many scholars try to find something new to write about so that they can put an academic paper with their name on it into circulation. And to achieve this, many of them are much more willing to twist/ignore opposing evidence. I have utmost respect for honest scholars, but spammers are not that respectworthy imo.

I am a staunch Sikh, and a lot of what McLeod says is VERY VERY TRUE (not all)

Guru Nanak Dev Ji really did preach an extension to another religion, even though I dont believe it was Hinduism as we know it. Sikhi has base is in the Vedic thinking, that includes Buddhism and Jainism.

Secondly, the Guru Granth Sahib Ji now is many peoples possesion was re-written into english by the British Raj CHRISITAN commander, Max Arthur MacAuliffe. So much understanding that westerns have of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji is EXTREMELY SKEWED.

Mr. MacAuliffe, has an agenda put forth by the British Raj to separate and divide Punjab, where the most ultimate defense to the Raj was building. He broke boundries between Sikhi and other religions and this was ALL to create confusion and separation.

I dont agree with some things Mcleod says, but alot of it is very true, hard to swallow but true