ABSTRACT
Few in Sikh or South Asian studies today would deny the importance of neo-colonial reform movements such as the Singh Sabha in transforming and eventually monopolising the interpretation of Sikh tradition. It is now increasingly accepted that the representation of modern Sikhism as an ethical monotheism owes much to the political activism and scholarly output of members of the Singh Sabha movement.2 However, as a recent editorial introduction rightly points out, the scholarly work of the Singh Sabha is also
responsible for a major obstacle to our understanding of the Sikh tradition, one which is rendered all the more serious by virtue of its being diffi cult to recognise. The obstacle derives from the remarkable measure of intellectual success achieved by a small group of Singh Sabha writers in formulating a distinctive interpretation of the Sikh tradition and in promulgating it as the only acceptable version . . . [M]en like Dit Singh, Vir Singh, Teja Singh, Kahn Singh of Nabha . . . were so successful in their attempt to reformulate the Sikh tradition that their general interpretation of the tradition acquired the status of implicit truth. That status it continues to hold to the present day.3
