Dr. W. Hew Mcleod: Difference between revisions

under construction

Hew McLeod came to Punjab half a century earlier as a missionary. His mission was to convert people to Christianity. Last Monday, when he died, had he not proclaimed himself largely an agnostic, many would have rushed to dub him almost a Sehajdhari Sikh.

Much did McLeod for Sikhism, and much gave Sikhism to McLeod. His life time’s work was the study of the Sikhs, and McLeod opened the window of the world to Sikhism. He lived a rich life, full of pursuit of truth, his fair share of controversies, an impressive body of writing and a commitment to the cause he found that lasted a lifetime.

To say that McLeod was an important name in Sikhism’s scholarship will be an understatement. As I.J. Singh wrote in a brilliant piece meant as a tribute to McLeod, he was “gentleman and a scholar” who was an “ex-missionary … not left untouched by the richness of Sikh teaching and faith” but most importantly “who has done more to introduce Sikhism to the world outside India than anyone else.”

W. Hew McLeod died at 11.00 pm, Monday, July 20, 2009 (New Zealand time) in Dunedin, New Zealand, after a lengthy illness. He was 77. The World Sikh News mourns his death and also holds that the best way to pay tribute to a scholar who has lived a life so extraordinarily rich is to try and re-engage with his work. That there was immense criticism of his work is a measure of the man as a scholar, and the special articles that this edition carries on inside pages about him reflect a diversity of opinion about McLeod’s approach and methodology.

It is a sign of the times that in Punjab, virtually no newspaper carried even the news of the death of Hew McLeod even on Wednesday, except a local edition of the Hindustan Times. In the dumbed down times, McLeod’s work and its criticism assume all the more importance.

While IJ Singh has touchingly narrated an incident when the scholar was sought to be cornered over his work at an informal dinner at Singh’s house but remained calm and poised, there are many who hold that McLeod brushed aside criticism with a ‘belief versus scholarship’ argument. One even said that often McLeod was convinced that his theory was probably wrong “but rather than completely retracting his statement, he (used to keep) a window open by putting a rider.”

Often, McLeod’s interpretations ran contrary to more accepted and acceptable interpretations of Prof Sahib Singh or even Macauliffe and never really answered the charge of misinterpreting Gurbani but wanted his readers to judge him for that. There are many who will find his tagging of the Institute of Sikh Studies as ‘traditionalist’ and many scholars’ work as ‘conservative’, problematic, but we must remember that while all historians may honestly try (Few do, of course), complete objectivity may be an ideal that may still not be within grasp. Further proof that historians are humans, too.

We have heard suggestions that McLeod’s approach was historical and the others’ based on belief. This is somewhat specious. There is an argument that having being taught in western tradition, McLeod’s way was to cast all aside and only accept what was backed by facts. This is tantamount to saying that all who preceded him or differed were guilty of having wrong facts. A historian’s truth is often relative, just like everyone’s else. Thankfully, in his autobiography, McLeod concedes that his work has all the limitations that the Western historical methods impose.

It will be fair to conclude that McLeod’s work helped the western world in trying to understand Sikhism in terms that the west was familiar with, while the Sikhs already knew only too well what to believe. Their notion of religion flows from Guru Nanak Dev ji to Guru Gobind Singh ji and from Sri Guru Granth Sahib.

And it is that understanding of our religion that inspires us today to pray for W. Hew McLeod, a man who lived his life well, and often by the high ideals of Sikhi. May his soul rest in peace. May this missionary finally meets God and converts fully instead of remaining an agnostic. We may differ on many of his views and interpretations, but let this be said without any reservation: He was a good man.

KHUSHWANT SINGH on mcleod

W.H. McLeod: A Pioneer in Sikh Studies

Khushwant Singh fails to appreciate that the true measure of the Singh Sabha movement's success at distilling the Sikh rahit tradition will continue to escape us unless we gain access to tools that allow us to contrast the current rahit with its flawed predecessors. McLeod's book Sikhs of the Khalsa: A History of the Khalsa Rahit is one such essential tool. It is critical that the blemishes present in the current edition of the Sikh Rahit Maryada be viewed not in isolation but in context with earlier textual versions of the rahit. However, the intellectual lethargy Khushwant displays here is not new. Other notable instances include blatant support (until much after it's conclusion) for Indira Gandhi's fascist Emergency rule (1975-1977) and the failure to denounce (again, until well after its conclusion; Jun. 20, 2003) state-sponsored terrorism in the Punjab (1984-1995).