An analysis of Sikh Fundamentalism

Douglas Tennant B.Sc., B.A., CMMIII, 

Professor Jeff Wilson

RS 260 – The Study of Religion

Wednesday October 14, 2009

An analysis of Sikh Fundamentalism

            I have recently been intrigued by the Sikh tradition and have been eager to expand my knowledge of it from a scholarly perspective. Wanting to learn about the fundamentals of Sikhism, my eye caught the article Sikh Fundamentalism by W.H. McLeod on the Kitchener Public Library religion and philosophy database collection. It was obvious from the abstract however, that the article was not just about the fundamentals of Sikhism but entailed a more scholarly secondary source style review of Sikh fundamentalism.

Sikhism by Doris Jakobsh -
University of Hawai'i Press
2012

The author and Sikh historian, William Hewat ("Hew") McLeod PhD., died July 20, 2009 with an extensive portfolio of academic and historical works about Sikhism to his credit (Ballantyne). “He produced a remarkable series of publications and was central in establishing Sikh studies as a distinctive field. Although his own work was careful, measured and judicious, it frequently provoked controversy” (Ballantyne). It is unique that McLeod moved as a Presbyterian Missionary from New Zealand to India whereupon he became interested and immersed in the Sikh tradition and eventually renounced his Christian faith and belief in God. The fact that McLeod renounced his belief in God is one thing, but what is all the more fascinating is that he carried on as a scholar/historian with his focus, as an “outsider”, on Sikhism. He garnered much attention and respect, if not acceptance however, both around the world and in the Sikh community as a renowned Sikh historian and scholar. McLeod spent five terms teaching at the University of Toronto (Ballantyne). "He became an international authority on the religion, perhaps the best known outside Punjab and India, and the man who has done more to introduce Sikhism to the world outside India than anyone else," said academic I.J. Singh (Sikh).

            The main argument of McLeod’s article is to “ascertain whether or in what way the epithet "fundamentalist" is applicable to the Sikh religion” (1). McLeod clearly outlines in his definition, that fundamentalism, from a religious viewpoint, has a central inerrant doctrine and that “[i]n theory at least it is possible to envisage fundamentalism within the Sikh Panth” (2). Moreover, when the word fundamentalism is viewed somewhat apart from its contemporary Western “epithetic” understanding, “the Sikh who solemnly reveres the scripture as Guru and who adopts a traditional view of Sikh practice can surely be regarded as fundamentalist” (McLeod 10).

As with all good secondary sources, the article interprets and examines in detail whether or not the term fundamentalism could or should be attributed to the Sikh faith. Using a series of six main questions or “objections” as he calls them (2), McLeod takes us on a “fundamentalist” fact finding journey through Sikh society from the extremes of the Khalistani socio-political-economic (terrorist) perspective (6), to a look at various Sikh sects and how they might be discerned as fundamentalists (2-5), to a short survey of other Sikh scholars and leaders about fundamentalism, through to a somewhat  historiographic review of religious canon as it might relate to Sikh fundamentalism (6-10).

In the end, McLeod convincingly concludes through a comparative, sociological and political/economic analysis, that there is such a thing as Sikh fundamentalism. However, he is not content with the assignment of the epithetic label of fundamentalism by Western media types and others on the general Sikh Panth when he states “that those of us [scholars] who stubbornly insist on the correct usage of the term [fundamentalism] have been fighting a losing battle” (13). Moreover, in keeping with the “so what?” probing feature of his contemporary historian/scholar Jonathan Z. Smith (Rodrigues 73) McLeod affirms that though:

 “the term [fundamentalist] has been widely applied to the Khalistan militants … for my part, though, the words "fundamentalist" and "fundamentalism" will retain a sole and exclusive meaning. The Khalistanis or other political radicals will seldom be true fundamentalists and should never be understood as authentic examples of Sikh fundamentalism (13).

In essence I take from the article that McLeod admonishes us to not give up on the lingua franca definition of fundamentalist and to pursue the “authentic” or scholarly understanding of the term as it pertains to Sikhism and its religious canon.

            McLeod’s article offers more than just a scholarly determination of whether or not the epithetic use of the term “fundamentalist” has been incorrectly applied to the Sikh Panth. In the course of his logical and cohesive presentation on Sikh fundamentalism, additional historiographic fundamentals of Sikhism are also outlined, making the article worth the read on that account alone.

Works Cited

Ballantyne, T. “WH McLeod:  New Zealand scholar and an authority on the history of Sikhism.”

Guardian 3 Sept. 2009. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/03/w-h-

mcleod-obituary>.

McLeod, W.H. "Sikh fundamentalism." The Journal of the American Oriental Society 

118.n1 (Jan-March 1998): 15(13). Infotrac Religion and Philosophy Collection. 

Gale. Kitchener Public Library (CELPLO). 12 Oct. 2009 

<http://find.galegroup.com/gtx/start.do?prodId=SPJ.SP00>.

Rodrigues, Hillary and John S. Harding. Introduction to the Study of Religion. New York:    

            Routledge, 2009.

“Sikh Historian From New Zealand W.H. McLeod Passes Away.” India

Server.Com 21 July 2009. <http://www.india-server.com/news/sikh-historian-from-new-

zealand-w-h-9302.html>