editorial articles reviews news & views - Institute of Sikh Studies
editorial articles reviews news & views - Institute of Sikh Studies
editorial articles reviews news & views - Institute of Sikh Studies
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
76<br />
ABSTRACTS OF SIKH STUDIES : APRIL-JUNE 2005 / 537 NS<br />
our mouths wide open”. The difference is that whereas Kabir talks <strong>of</strong><br />
puppies speaking to God, Fenech does not speak to even Lord Christ<br />
for munificence, but to McLeod, obviously, for worldly gains. I would<br />
prefer to call them yuppies – young urban pr<strong>of</strong>essionals out to seek<br />
McLeod’s munificence for material gains.<br />
It is in this view that Fenech proceeds to examine the <strong>Sikh</strong> tradition<br />
<strong>of</strong> martyrdom to belittle, if not demolish, in his own style the whole<br />
concept and achievements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Sikh</strong> martyrs, <strong>of</strong>ten contradicting<br />
himself, not knowing what stand to take.<br />
III<br />
Fenech starts his first chapter, Introduction, with two grievous<br />
misstatements. Firstly, the opening sentence is preposterous. It reads,<br />
“To many contemporary <strong>Sikh</strong>s and non-<strong>Sikh</strong>s the concept <strong>of</strong> martyrdom<br />
or Sahadat also Shahidi is fundamental to <strong>Sikh</strong>ism and represents an<br />
exceptionally important institution.” The question immediately arises,<br />
who are these “many <strong>Sikh</strong>s”(), and “non-<strong>Sikh</strong>s”() and, what is<br />
“fundamental to <strong>Sikh</strong>ism” To all <strong>Sikh</strong>s nam-simran, meditating the<br />
name <strong>of</strong> God, is fundamental to <strong>Sikh</strong>ism. The only non-<strong>Sikh</strong>s who<br />
could give that much importance to Shahadat or Shahidi could be agents<br />
<strong>of</strong> Indian intelligence set-up, or its various branches, who had<br />
masterminded the militancy movement in Indira Gandhi’s second term<br />
as India’s Prime Minister, or these could be McLeodian yuppies and<br />
people belonging to his school <strong>of</strong> thought in North America. With<br />
this type <strong>of</strong> misstatements, which could only be result <strong>of</strong> briefing by<br />
Indian intelligence set-up, McLeodian stalwart proceeds to build up<br />
his thesis.<br />
Secondly, in the very second sentence <strong>of</strong> chapter three, this yuppy<br />
proceeds to contradict what he wrote in the very first sentence <strong>of</strong><br />
chapter one. He proceeds to say, “Of course, even a cursory glance at<br />
popular <strong>Sikh</strong> accounts will invalidate this claim,” by Mona Kang that<br />
“one can say that <strong>Sikh</strong> history is the history <strong>of</strong> martyrs.” He continues,<br />
rightly, that, “At any stage in the diachronic development there was<br />
far more to <strong>Sikh</strong>ism than martyrs and martyrdom,” The point is, that<br />
this McLeodian stalwart is not sure as to what is the real position-the