Negative Positive
Title: Poor research based on unauthentic manuscript
Review: The work is pooly researched and based on an unauthentic manuscript, which the author refers to as the Goindval Pothis. Before selecting and basing one's thesis on a primary source, it behooves a scholar to ensure that it is authentic. Gurinder Mann has failed to do so. Scholarly analysis, _Early Sikh Scriptural Tradition: Myth and Reality_, by Balwant Singh Dhillon (Amritsar: Singh Brothers, 1999) shows that Gurinder Mann's _The Goindval Pothis_ and subsequent works are highly problematic. They are based on his pooly written PhD thesis. Dhillon's aforementioned work is a definitive refutation of all of Gurinder Mann's research. Save your money and purchase Dhillon's work which provides a much better understanding of the Sikh cannon and also gives insight into work by fading scholars such as Gurinder Mann.
Is the review positive or negative? 