1 SOPHISTRY OF DR. W.H. McLEOD A CRITIQUE OF HIS ARGUMENTS ABOUT SIKH HISTORY AND SIKH RELIGION Amarjit S. Bal, Ph.D. SHORT STATEMENT ABOUT THE MANUSCRIPT / BOOK Dr. W.H. McLeod is a highly controversial author because of his extreme opinions expressed in his books on Sikh history and religion. The perspectives of his critics include psychoanalysis of his personality and rebuttals pointing out his misinterpretations and misrepresentations of Sikh history and religion. In the present work we attempt to examine the reasoning, Dr. McLeod uses, to advance his arguments. We review the anatomy or the architecture of his reasoning. The objective of this critique is to uncover the truth; to expose fallacious reasoning; and to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of Dr. McLeod’s arguments. We have characterized Dr. McLeod’s arguments as sophistic. This accounts for the legitimacy of the title of this book. As a sophist, DR. McLeod is adroit and specious in his reasoning. His reasoning, although clever, is frequently misleading. His arguments give the impression that he is stating the truth. However, the arguments turn out to be flawed when subjected to the laws of logic. The method used to critique Dr. McLeod’s arguments is dialectics. This method requires adherence to the laws of logic in order to distinguish truth from error. The ratiocination thus carried out has exposed numerous flaws in Dr. McLeod’s arguments. Dr. McLeod, his students and others who support his views on Sikh history and religion have circulated ideas that distort the truth about Sikh beliefs and Sikh community. The menace of distortions of truth has continued unabated for several decades. Evidently, this situation hurts the mission of those who would like to see Sikhism presented to the world in its true form. Dr. McLeod rejects Guru Nanak’s visit to Mecca. He rejects the tradition behind Panja Sahib. He rejects the context of Siddh Gust of Guru Nanak. He doubts that Guru Gobind Singh made the declaration at Nander (Hazoor Sahib) about Granth Sahib to be the eternal Guru of the Sikhs, after his death. He questions the truthfulness and integrity of such Sikhs as Bhai Bala, Bhai Gurdas, Bhai Mani Singh and many scholars of later times. He 2 rejects the fact that Guru Nanak is the founder of Sikh Religion. He characterizes the janam-sakhis (biographies) of Guru Nanak as wonder stories. The dialectical analysis of Dr. McLeod’s arguments challenges his extreme and untenable opinions. This analysis demonstrates specific flaws in them. We establish that his views on Sikh history and religion merely reflect his biases and speculations but lack in factual content. Dr. W.H. McLeod is a highly controversial author because of his extreme opinions expressed in his books on Sikh history and religion. The perspectives of his critics include psychoanalysis of his personality and rebuttals pointing out his misinterpretations and misrepresentations of Sikh history and religion. In the present work we attempt to examine the reasoning Dr. McLeod uses to advance his arguments. We review the anatomy or the architecture of his reasoning used in developing his arguments. The objective of this critique is to uncover the truth and to expose fallacious reasoning; to evaluate the validity and trustworthiness of Dr. McLeod’s arguments. We have characterized Dr. McLeod’s arguments as sophistic. This accounts for the legitimacy of the title of this book. As a sophist, DR. McLeod is adroit and specious in his reasoning. His reasoning, although clever, is frequently misleading. His arguments give the impression that he is stating the truth. However, the arguments turn out to be flawed when subjected to the laws of logic. The method used to critique Dr. McLeod’s arguments is dialectics. This method requires adherence to the laws of logic in order to distinguish truth from error. The ratiocination thus carried out has exposed numerous flaws in Dr. McLeod’s arguments. Dr. McLeod, his students and others who support his views on Sikh history and religion have circulated ideas that distort the truth about Sikh beliefs and Sikh community. The menace of distortions of truth has continued unabated for several decades. Evidently, this situation hurts the mission of those who would like to see Sikhism presented to the world in its true form. ABOUT THE AUTHOR After completion of the Doctor of Philosophy degree in Education at the University of California at Berkeley in 1970, Amarjit Singh Bal completed a year of post-doctoral fellowship at the same institution. For a year, he taught at the University of California at Berkeley and at the California State University at Hayward. His doctoral dissertation was a comparative study of the educational objectives of John Dewey and Mahatma Gandhi. Dr. Bal worked for the State of California as Educational Researcher and as Educational Administrator for about twenty six years. He retired in December 2000. He co-directed a pioneering research study, funded by the United States Department of Education to examine educational equity for Punjabi youth at a high school in Central California. He is 3 keenly interested in the advancement of Sikh Panth. This interest motivated him to critique Dr. W.H. McLeod’s arguments about Sikh history and Sikh religion. His hope is that ‘Sophistry of W.H. McLeod’ would help in stopping misrepresentations of the faith and history of Sikhs as well as it would encourage scholars to disseminate authentic information about these two topics. In retirement, Dr. Bal does volunteer work as well as serve as a Director and Secretary of the San Joaquin County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. Dr. Amarjit Singh Bal is an educator. He taught at the University of California and California State University. The majority of his professional work, as an education researcher and education administrator, has been with the State of California. Dr. Bal contracted with the United States Department of Education to do pioneering research and examine the education equity for Punjabi youth in a high school in central California. He is keenly interested in the advancement of Sikh Panth. This interest motivated him to critique Dr. W.H. McLeod’s arguments about Sikh history and Sikh religion. His hope is that ‘Sophistry of W.H. McLeod’ would help in stopping misrepresentations of the faith and history of Sikhs as well as it would encourage scholars to disseminate authentic information about these two topics. In retirement, Dr. Bal does volunteer work. He serves as a Director and Secretary of the San Joaquin County Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. Amarjit Singh Bal holds a doctorate in Education from the University of California at Berkeley. He taught at the University of California and at California State University. The majority of his professional work, as an education researcher and education administrator, was with the State of California. He is keenly interested in the advancement of Sikh Panth. This prompted him to author ‘Sophistry of Dr. W.H. McLeod’. KEYNOTE: BOOK MARKETING STATEMENT This book incisively uncovers the flaws in specious reasoning used by Dr. W.H. McLeod in his arguments about Sikh history and Sikh religion. KEYWORDS TO FIND THE BOOK IN A BOOKSTORE SOPHISTRY OF DR. W.H. MCLEOD (BY AMARJIT SINGH BAL, Ph.D.) IN HUMBLE SERVICE OF SIKH GURUS: GURU NANAK TO GURU GRANTH SAHIB 4 DEDICATED TO TRUTH AND SAGACITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My goal in publishing this book is to serve the cause of truth about Guru Nanak’s life and teachings. In this regard, I have endeavored to accomplish a fair and accurate analysis of the arguments I have critiqued. Any success that I have achieved towards my goal is due to the Grace and Guidance of the Guru. Where I have fallen short of my goal, it is because of the limits of my intelligence. I am most grateful to my Guru for enabling me to finish my work that I decided to undertake. I am thankful to my wife Tejinder who always encourages me to pen down my thoughts on various subjects, and publish. This book, in large measure, is a result of that encouragement and the patience she showed towards my sustained work of reading, thinking and typing for about two years. 5 I am deeply appreciative of the love and respect given to me and my wife by our two sons, Gurman and Shami. The same is true for their wives, Devinder and Rommel. Our grandson Agamjot and granddaughter Noor continue to give us joy. In the context of these blessings, the manuscript progressed that much more easily. In September, 2005, Tejinder had an illness which caused a delay of several months in finishing the manuscript. By God’s Grace she is now in good health. I am thankful to my publishers, M/S Bhai Chatter Singh Jiwan Singh. I am greatly appreciative of the pains they have taken to shape my manuscript into a beautifully finished book. Copyright © Amarjit Singh Bal 2006, 2007 SOPHISTRY OF DR. W.H. McLEOD A CRITIQUE OF HIS ARGUMENTS ABOUT SIKH HISTORY AND SIKH RELIGION Amarjit S. Bal, Ph.D. ____________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………… TOPICS OF SOPHISTIC ARGUMENTS 1. DR. MCLEOD’S SELF-IMPOSED INJUNCTION REGARDING HIS ARGUMENTS…………… 2. SCOPE OF THE BOOK ‘GURU NANAK AND THE SIKH RELIGION’………….............. 3. DOCTRINES OF GURU NANAK ………………………………………………………… 4. OBJECTIVES OF THE BOOK ‘GURU NANAK AND THE SIKH RELIGION’………… 6 5. RAHIT OF THE KHALSA………………………………………………………………… 6. FOUNDER OF SIKHISM…………………………………………………………………… 7. GURU GOBIND SINGH’S EDICT ABOUT GURU GRANTH SAHIB…………………… 8. STATURE OF GURU NANAK………………………………………………………….. 9. THE OBSCURE ONE-HUNDRED YEARS OF SIKH HISTORY………………………… 10. SOURCE MATERIAL FOR BOOK ‘GURU NANAK AND THE SIKH RELIGION’…… 11.