The State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

Urdu, English, Social Studies and Civics
Editors: A. H. Nayyar and Ahmad Salim
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT POLICY INSTITUTE

Report of the project
“A Civil Society Initiative in Curricula and Textbooks Reform”
A project of the
Sustainable Development Policy Institute
#3, UN Boulevard, Diplomatic Enclave I, Islamabad
Mailing Address: PO Box 2342, Islamabad, Pakistan
Telephone: ++(92-51) 2278134, 2278136, 2270674-6
Fax:++(92-51) 2278135 URL: www.sdpi.org e-mail: main@sdpi.org
SDPI is an independent, non-profit research institute on sustainable development
Printed with support from Liberal Forum Pakistan
Partial support from Eqbal Ahmed Foundation is also gratefully acknowledged.

PREFACE

Part I

This report is the result of a study conducted by SDPI with the help of a number of
educationists and concerned citizens of the country in the year 2002. The study looked
into the then in force curriculum documents and school textbooks as well as those
curriculum documents that were most recently formulated but had not been implemented
yet. The objective of the study was to identify problematic contents of textbooks and to
ascertain if the curriculum formulation was the source of such contents. The subjects
chosen were those which can offer a greater space for political and ideological
manipulation.
States quite often use formal education as a tool to disseminate and perpetuate their
political messages. In the Pakistani context, the use of education as a political tool
intensified after 1971 mainly due to the demands of redefining Pakistan after the political
crisis of East Pakistan and emergence of Pakistan as a truncated country. The military
government of General Zia ul Haq after the coup in 1977 had its own problem of
legitimacy, which it tried to guise in an overarching quest for Islamization of the society.
Education was among the first of its victims. Religious political parties became
enthusiastic partners in this quest. In the educational sphere, this amounted to a
distorted narration of history, factual inaccuracies, inclusion of hate material, a
disproportionate inclusion of Islamic studies in other disciplines, glorification of war and
the military, gender bias, etc. Subsequent governments either failed to check these
harmful deviations, or willingly perpetuated them.

Four themes emerge most strongly as constituting the bulk of the curricula and textbooks of
the three compulsory subjects.
1. that Pakistan is for Muslims alone;
2. that Islamic teachings, including a compulsory reading and memorization of Qur’an,
are to be included in all the subjects, hence to be forcibly taught to all the students,
whatever their faith,;
3. that Ideology of Pakistan is to be internalized as faith, and that hate be created against
Hindus and India; and
4. students are to be urged to take the path of Jehad and Shahadat.

We shall elaborate on them one by one.

Hate Material

Associated with the insistence on the Ideology of Pakistan has been an essential component
of hate against India and the Hindus.For the upholders of the Ideology of Pakistan, the existence of Pakistan is defined only in relation to Hindus, and hence the Hindus have to be painted as negatively as possible.
That the pathological hate against Hindus is only because of adopting the so-called Ideology
of Pakistan is borne out by the fact that the pre-Ideology (before the 1970s) textbooks of
Pakistan did not contain this hatred. Although a lot of animosity towards Hindus might well
have been expected in the newborn Pakistan because of the bloo.. riots of the partition,
the early textbooks in Pakistan, many written after the partition, were free of the
pathological hate that we see in textbooks today. For example:
1. The early history books contained chapters on both the oldest civilizations Moen Jo
Daro, Harappa, Gandhara, etc., but also the early Hindu mythologies of Ramayana
and Mahabharata and extensively covered, often with admiration, the great Hindu
and Buddhist kingdoms of the Mauryas and the Guptas.
2. The books indeed showed biases when discussing the more recent history of the
politics of independence, but still one found school textbooks with chapters on Mr.
M. K. Gandhi, using words of respect for him and admiring him for his qualities.
3. Even in the somewhat biased history of politics of independence, the creation of
Pakistan was reasoned on the intransigence of the All India Congress and its
leadership rather than on ‘Hindu machinations’.
4. Some books also clearly mentioned that the most prominent Islamic religious
leaders were all bitterly opposed to the creation of Pakistan.
Such was the enlightened teaching of history for the first twenty five years of Pakistan
even though two wars were fought against India in this period. The print and electronic
media often indulged in anti-Hindu propaganda, but the educational material was by and
large free of bias against Hindus.

Then came the time when Indo-Pakistan History and Geography were replaced with
Pakistan Studies, and Pakistan was defined as an Islamic state. The history of Pakistan
became equivalent to the history of Muslims in the subcontinent. It started with the Arab
conquest of Sindh and swiftly jumped to the Muslim conquerors from Central Asia.
Simultaneously, there started a trend in the 1970s of stressing the so-called Ideology of
Pakistan. This involved creating an ideological straitjacket in which history of Pakistan,
especially that of the Pakistan Movement was to be re-written. Pakistan was told to have
been created to establish a truly Islamic state in accordance with the tenets of Qur’an
and Sunnah. The Ulema who had bitterly opposed the creation of Pakistan were turned
into heroes of Pakistan movement. The Quaid-i-Azam was represented as a pious
practicing Muslim. And hate and denigration was created for Hindus. A few examples of
the expression of this hate in some recent curriculum documents and textbooks are
given below.
Curriculum documents state the following as the specific learning objectives:

[The child should be able to] understand the Hindu and Muslim differences and
the resultant need for Pakistan98
Develop understanding of the Hindu Muslim Differences and need for Pakistan99
Hindu-Muslim Differences in Culture, .. India’s evil designs against Pakistan (the
three wars with India)100
Identify the events in relation to Hindu-Muslim differences, which laid the
foundations for Pakistan10

Quote:

The textbooks then respond in the following way to the above curriculum instructions:
Hindu has always been an enemy of Islam.102
The religion of the Hindus did not teach them good things -- Hindus did not
respect women...103
Hindus worship in temples which are very narrow and dark places, where they
worship idols. Only one person can enter the temple at a time. In our mosques,
on the other hand, all Muslims can say their prayers together.104
‘ … the social evils of the Hindus’105
Hindus thought that there was no country other than India, nor any people other
than the Indians, nor did anyone else possess any knowledge106.
[A story “The Enemy Pilot”, about a captured Indian pilot, presumably of Hindu
faith] He had only been taught never to have pity on Muslims, to always bother
the neighbouring Muslims, to weaken them to the extent that they forget about
freedom, and that it is better to finish off the enemy. He remembered that the
Hindus tried to please their Devi Kali by slaughtering innocent people of other
faiths at her feet; that they regarded everybody else as untouchables. He knew
that his country India had attacked Pakistan in the dead of the night to bleed
Pakistani Muslims and to dominate the entire Subcontinent.107
The Hindus who have always been opportunists cooperated with the English.108
…but Hindus very cunningly succeeded in making the British believe that the
Muslims were solely responsible for the [1857] rebellion.109
Nehru report exposed the Hindu mentality.
The Quaid saw through the machinations of the Hindus.111
Hindus declared the Congress rule as the Hindu rule, and started to unleash terror
on Muslims.112
The Hindus always desired to crush the Muslims as a nation. Several attempts were
made by the Hindus to erase the Muslim culture and civilisation. Hindi-Urdu
controversy, shudhi and sanghtan movements are the most glaring examples of the
ignoble Hindu mentality.113
While the Muslims provided all type of help to those wishing to leave Pakistan, the
people of India committed cruelties against the Muslims (refugees). They would
attack the buses, trucks, and trains carrying the Muslim refugees and they were
murdered and looted.114
After 1965 war India conspired with the Hindus of Bengal and succeeded in
spreading hate among the Bengalis about West Pakistan and finally attacked on
East Pakistan in December 71, thus causing the breakup of East and West
Pakistan.115

Ahmed Salim

Much has been written on fabrication of false histories to suit political ideologies both in
Pakistan and India. History continues to be used as a tool of indoctrination in favour of
controversial ideologies. As enemy images are created in the name of history, textbooks
pollute the minds and impregnate imagination of millions of children in both countries with
hatred and animosity towards each other. State-sponsored textbooks illustrate how history
has been appropriated to reinforce national philosophies or ideologies. Historical
interpretations are therefore predetermined, impregnable and concretised.
In Pakistan, the impression one gets from textbooks on the subjects of Social/Pakistan
studies is that students don’t learn history. Rather, they are forced to read a carefully crafted
collection of falsehoods and fairy tales. . History has been used to churn out a mythology
about the struggle that led to the creation of Pakistan. Ayesha Jalal analyses history as an
official imagining tool to conjure Pakistan:

A unique view of Pakistan

In these books, Muhammad-bin-Qasim is declared the first Pakistani citizen. In Social
Studies for Class VI (Sindh Textbook Board, 1997), the story of the Arabs’ arrival in Sindh is
accounted as the first moment of Pakistan with the glorious ascendancy of Islam. This
textbook teaches the young sixth-class school children of Sindh that, “The Muslims knew
that the people of South Asia were infidels and they kept thousands of idols in their temples”.
The Sindhi king, Raja Dahir, is described as cruel and despotic. “The non-Brahmans who
were tired of the cruelties of Raja Dahir, joined hands with Muhammad-bin-Qasim because
of his good treatment.”1

According to this historical narration:
“the conquest of Sindh opened a new chapter in the history of South Asia.
Muslims had ever-lasting effects of their existence in the region… For the first
time the people of Sindh were introduced to Islam, its political system and way of
government. The people here had seen only the atrocities of the Hindu Rajas…
the people of Sindh were so much impressed by the benevolence of Muslims
that they regarded Muhammad-bin-Qasim as their saviour… Muhammad bin-
Qasim stayed in Sindh for over three years. On his departure from Sindh, the
local people were overwhelmed with grief.”

An extraordinary result of defining Pakistan in terms of religion alone is something which is
unprecedented in historical narration, let alone school textbooks. A textbook of Pakistan
Studies states:
“…. as a matter of fact, Pakistan came to be established for the first time when
the Arabs led by Muhammad-bin-Qasim occupied Sindh and Multan in the early
years of the eighth century, and established Muslim rule in this part of the South-
Asian Sub-continent. Pakistan under the Arabs comprised the Lower Indus
Valley.”169
It is interesting to note the flight of imagination of the history book author:
“…. during the 11th century the Ghaznavid Empire comprised what is now
Pakistan and Afghanistan. During the 12th century the Ghaznavids lost
Afghanistan, and their rule came to be confined to Pakistan. … By the 13th
century, Pakistan had spread to include the whole of Northern India and
Bengal… Under the Khiljis Pakistan moved further Southward to include a
greater part of Central India and the Deccan… Many Mongols accepted Islam.
As such Pakistan remained safe for Islam… During the 16th century, ‘Hindustan’
disappeared and was completely absorbed in ‘Pakistan’… Under Aurangzeb the
Pakistan spirit gathered in strength. This evoked the opposition of the Hindus…
After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, the process of the disintegration of
Mughal Rule set in, and weakened the Pakistan Spirit… The shape of Pakistan
in the 18th Century was thus more or less the same as it was under the
Ghaznavids in the 11th century.”170
This is not the end. The author continues:
“Shah Waliullah accordingly appealed to Ahmad Shah Durrani, the ruler of
Afghanistan and ‘Pakistan’ to come to the rescue of the Muslims of Mughal
India, and save them from the tyrannies of the Marhattas… Ahmad Shah Durrani
died in 1773, and with his death things became dark for the Muslims both in
‘Pakistan’ and Mughal India. In the ‘Pakistan’ territories the Sikhs raised their
head in the Punjab and became a great headache for the successors of Ahmad
Shah Durrani… In the ‘Pakistan’ territories, where a Sikh state had come to be
established, the Muslims were denied the freedom of religion. The Mujahideen
set up an Islamic state in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) which was a
manifestation of Pakistan spirit… Thus by the middle the 19th century both
‘Pakistan’ and Hindustan had ceased to exist; instead British India had come
into existence.
Although Pakistan was created in August 1947, yet except for its name, the
present-day Pakistan has existed, as a more or less single entity, for
centuries.171

As far as freedom struggle and the contemporary history of Pakistan is concerned, all the
textbooks are full of errors and false statements. The history in these books is claimed an
unpunctured and smooth fabric and is presented exclusively in religious terms i.e., Hindus
versus Muslims and no economic, historical, social or political causes given; two nation
theory justified and all history of mutual co-existence denied. For example, a grave historical
distortion appears when all resistance in 1857 is claimed for Muslims whereas the Hindus
and Sikhs were also a part of it.172

Regarding congress ministries in India, the following long statement exemplifies the
communal narration of history:

Quote:

“This was the first instance of rule by representative and responsible
governments in India. The Congress had been demanding for a long time that
power should be exercised to the maximum extent by the people of India. Since
it claimed to be a party representing all the communities, it was a test of its
claims. Moreover the future political system of India also depended on the new
dispensation. However, the party failed miserably in this test. Notwithstanding
verbal claims to being representative it showed itself to be a narrow-minded
Hindu organizaton. In the provinces ruled by it many measures were undertaken
which grievously harmed the interests and rights of the Muslims. The most
significant of these was the introduction of Hindi as the official language and the
medium of instruction. This was part of the attempt to foist Hindu culture and
civilization in the subcontinent. The reaction of Muslim leaders to this attempt
was violent, but the Hindus paid no heed to it and went on with the policy of
imposing Hindi in their provinces. In addition the Congress flag was treated as
the national flag and the poem “Bande Mataram” as the national song. The
Congress flag was flown on all official and semi-official buildings, though the
Muslims were not allowed to fly the Muslim League flag on the premises of
municipal committees where they were in a majority.
“In order to create confusion in the ranks of the Muslims and to weaken the
Muslim League, the Congress launched a popular Muslim contact campaign,
during which disgraceful attacks were made on the personalities of Muslim
leaders, particularly the Quaid-e-Azam. The campaign was aimed solely at
Muslims and the objective was to loosen their links with the Muslim League. No
elected member of the League was included in the provincial councils of
ministers, whereas the impression was current during the elections that the two
parties would form coalition governments. The Congress studiously abstained
from this, and, in fact, tried to harm the very existence of the League as a party.
This added to the gulf of differences between the two parties.
“The Congress also introduced the Wardha and Vidya Mandir education
schemes in its provinces. The Wardha scheme aimed at infusing Indian
nationalism in children, and the textbooks prepared under it were crammed with
lessons in Hindu culture and the over-idealised exploits of heroic Hindu
personalities. Vidya Mandir too was part of this programme and one of its
objectives was to open schools in every village to impart education in the mother
tongue. The Congress also introduced on 2 October 1938 the worship of M.K.Gandhi’s portrait in the schools on his birthday, wearing of the Gandhi cap and
singing of the “Bande Mataram”. On this Muslims of many areas expressed their
deep displeasure. During the same period the Hindus gave a fillip to the
campaign of cow protection, and this led to much armed conflict due to the
Muslims’ defence of their right to slaughter cows. The administration invariably
sided with the Hindus. At many places the conflict led to rioting in which the
Muslims suffered considerable losses, because the police held them
responsible. They also faced many problems in obtaining employment and due
representation in municipal committees, etc.”173

Civics textbooks carry on with many of the faults of social studies in that there is no coherent
order of the contents. The ideological content is pervasive and the economic and political
factors that led to the creation of Pakistan are ignored completely. In ‘Civics of Pakistan’, for
class XI and XII as Rubina Saigol notes several statements are of the same nature.

􀁸􀀃 A brief History and Ideology of Pakistan - history is immediately divided along communal
lines by stating how badly the British treated the Muslims while they showered favours
upon the Hindus. This is stated without referring to several extraordinary favours that
Muslims received, like separate electorate, partition of Bengal, special job quotas, etc.
(Page 1, Chapter 1)

􀁸􀀃 The partition of Bengal is presented with a great deal of anti-Hindu sentiment and the
bad treatment of the Muslims at the hands of Hindus; again history is missing form this
History, creating a lot of religious prejudice.
(Page 5)
􀁸􀀃 All history is along religious lines while social, historical, material and economic causes
are missing.
(Page 6)
􀁸􀀃 Gandhi is throughout presented as a fundamentalist and extremist; Gandhi’s other side
as a tolerant and peace loving leader is ignored.
(Page 9)
􀁸􀀃 Tone is again very anti-Gandhi; what is omitted unjustly is that Gandhi was killed by
Hindu extremist groups for being too tolerant of the Muslims.
(Page 15)
􀁸􀀃 The bad treatment of Hindus towards Muslims is again repeated, this time in the context
of Congress Ministries; the bad treatment was by some of the leaders but the impression
created is that all Hindus treated all Muslims badly with no retaliation; this kind of
falsification and denial distorts history.
(Page 16 and 23)
􀁸􀀃 Again a great deal of anti-Hindu sentiment; reference to ‘Hindu Machiavellianism’ to
create negative images against Hindus.
(Page 24)
􀁸􀀃 India is accused of mass killing of Muslims which led to mass migration; the same
happened on this side of the border, Hindu and Sikhs were also killed but only one side
is blamed; students should do critical work on partition and how it led to mass bloodshed,
dislocation and break up of families and violence; they should analyze why it happened
and how it can be stopped; by blaming mass exodus on ‘Hindu India’ a very one-sided
and uncritical picture is created; since no reasoning or causes or dynamic are presented
it sounds very essentialist and biased.

After the 1965 war, India, with the help of the Hindus living in East Pakistan,
instigated the people living there against the people of West Pakistan, and at
last in December 1971 herself invaded East Pakistan. The conspiracy resulted in
the separation of East Pakistan from us. All of us should receive military training
and be prepared to fight the enemy.180

Another textbook puts it this way:
“There were a large number of Hindus in East Pakistan. They had never really
accepted Pakistan. A large number of them were teachers in schools and
colleges. They continued creating a negative impression among the students.
No importance was attached to explaining the ideology of Pakistan to the
younger generation. The Hindus sent a substantial part of their earnings to
Bharat, thus adversely affecting the economy of the province. Some political
leaders encouraged provincialism for the selfish purpose of gaining power. They
went round depicting the central Government and (the then) West Pakistan as
hostile and exploiters. Political aims were thus achieved at the cost of national
unity.”

S. Khurshid Hasanain

The educational process is, at one plane, a process of the definition and formation of the
individual and collective identity. As the process unfolds itself some of the basic social and
psychological concerns of the individual are addressed, whether consciously or
unconsciously. Who am I, and what is my relation to the past and to the future? How do I
relate to other human beings? What should I do with my life? The personality extending
outwards from the confines of the immediate family can make extensions and find affinities
of ideas, values, goals and aspirations, often transcending neighborhood, city, country and
continent, the extent of liberation depending on the individual’s own independence of mind
and action. Probably no age has had the opportunity, particularly at the mass level, to form
such a liberated and non-parochial outlook as our own. This is in part because of the
revolutionizing power of technology i.e. the electronic media and their ability to demystify
national and cultural differences and the freedom to trash popularly held but false notions.
However the same technological capabilities in tandem with coercive political mechanisms
and systematic indoctrination can be used to subvert the process of education from being a
liberating experience to one that creates an identity hostile to all manifestations of difference,
alienated from much of its own past and most of its present.

This is the saga and the tragedy of the present day Pakistani education system, deeply
committed to attaining certain ideological and political goals and the formation of a specific
“identity “ conducive to these ideological goals. How these ideological goals came to be set
about and their specific utility for the ruling elite is beyond the scope of this essay. However
what we shall point out here are the major casualties of this process in the form of major
themes and ideas of both general and specific relevance for our country and our times that
have been jettisoned and omitted from the textbooks. This has been done since these
themes and ideas did not fit the ideological straitjacket in which the young Pakistani mind
was sought to be confined. The net effect of this process has been to create a deep rooted
alienation where several generations having undergone this training are unable to contribute
to formulating a creative national and social identity, and unable to develop a sense of
commitment that goes beyond religious jingoism, militarism and narrow minded nationalism.

The Subtle Subversion: The state of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

[b]History

Several authors have identified how the writing of history in Pakistan has been
systematically distorted to foster an artificial identity and ideology. The entire focus of this
effort is directed towards proving the historical differences, enmities and differences between
Muslims and Hindus and the righteousness of the Muslims as opposed to the cunning,
deceit and cruelty of Hindus. A further objective is to establish in the child’s mind that there
has never been any period of amity or intermingling between the peoples of these religions
since that is to be made the basis for justifying the demand for Pakistan. To establish this
identity history was rewritten to omit entire epochs of our past. For instance the textbooks
written till 1961 contained detailed accounts of the ancient Hindu mythology and the Hindu
and Buddhist dynasties that ruled the area which is now Pakistan. However, later textbooks
entirely omit these ancient periods (e.g. Mauriya dynasty, Ashoka, etc.) while some make a
brief reference to the Buddhist period (See e.g. Social Studies, Class-VI). This omission of a
very important period of the history of this land besides being intellectually dishonest has
had the effect, probably deliberate, of inculcating in children a sense of alienation from their
Hindu neighbors in India as if we have never been part of a common history or shared
historical experience.
After some brief descriptions of ancient societies (Moen Jo Daro and Harrappa , pre-Hindu)
history makes an abrupt jump to the advent of Muslims (Mohammed Bin Qasim). In an
attempt to present Muslims as always acting for noble purposes and not motivated by
desires of conquest and domination, the Arab’s conflict with the rulers of Sindh is presented
as a response to the attack on a pilgrim ship. This selective portrayal hides the many
previous attacks by the Arabs on the Makran-Baluchistan area which were repulsed by the
local rulers. There is no attempt to link these conflicts with the actual political and economic
motivations e.g. the control of trade routes, expansion of empires etc. that were prevalent in
that period. By omitting a critical and honest discussion of these factors and by glorifying and
romanticizing these conquests the student is deprived of learning about the forces and
dynamics that shape history, in particular those that have shaped the destiny of our own
land. Somewhat similar comments can be made with regard to the advent of later Muslim
rulers such as Mahmud Ghaznavi, Mohammad Ghauri and later on the Mughals and finally
Ahmad Shah Abdali. Rather than discuss objectively the motivations behind the invasions
and the reasons why the invading powers were in general able to subdue local resistance,
all these events are covered under the panoply of Islam versus Hinduism. The triumph of
every adventurer becomes the triumph and glory of Islam.

The British Period:

The Colonial Experience and the Independence Movement

Moving on to a later period, the advent of the British and their very systematic and rapid
control and plunder of India, the textbooks are woefully free of anything which can help
understand the phenomenon of colonialism. The books contain no reference to the
Renaissance and the consequent development of learning and the technology in the West;
the rapid growth of industry and its push for cheap raw material and captive markets etc.
They never identify that it was an advanced understanding, modern technology and more
systematic human organization that enabled the domination of tens of millions of Indians by
a few thousand Englishmen. The books thus fail to drive home a crucial lesson that
independence and affluence in the modern era are based on the power of knowledge and
command over technology. The student could be exposed to the vision of an alternate
history e.g. by asking as to what could have been the history of this part of the world if the
early Mughal emperors had not disdainfully rejected the offer of Western traders to introduce
their newly invented technologies, for example, the printing press which was rejected by
74[/b]

Omissions that Could Have Been Enriching

Akbar by taking refuge in the excuse that it would render Katibs (scribes) jobless. The books
furthermore are silent on the outmoded and bankrupt economic and social order of the
Mughal Raj, the Nawabs and Rajas that existed at the time and why that left no incentive for
the population to spontaneously defy the rise of the British. Once again we observe a
description of history divorced from the local economic and social determinants.

Social Structure

While the treachery of various local individuals is often pointed out, for example Mir Jaffar,
Mir Sadiq and the Nizam of Hyderabad, what is not developed to any extent is the fact that
there was at that time no notion of any higher political unit such as the nation or the country
to which people in general owed allegiance once the Mughal dynasty had become a spent
force. The student is never exposed to the profound implications, communal differences
aside, of the transformation of a traditional society with its local hierarchical structures into a
nation state or states. The absence of this discussion renders it very difficult if not impossible
for the average student to comprehend the various, often conflicting, trends of nationalism
that emerged in the later part of the nineteenth century. The discourse is always in terms of
us versus them, Muslims versus Hindus, as opposed to the more fundamental division that
existed, viz., between Indian nationalism and British colonialism. Such a discourse of history
can only perpetuate animosities between peoples without serving the main purpose
ostensibly sought, namely to create a sense of Pakistani identity based on something more
than a negation of the Hindu identity.

Exploitation

One of the major casualties of this method which relegates the anti-colonial experience to a
secondary issue as compared to the communal question is that the Pakistani student never
becomes acquainted with the meaning of his or her colonial past and its vestiges which
continue to dominate life even today in the form of an elite class of civil and military
bureaucracies, landlords and comprador capitalists. How the colonizing power created new
elites from amongst those who had collaborated with it against their own people and how the
Jagirs and lands were allotted is not discussed, since those vast Jagirs and their
concomitant power and privileges are sacrosanct in the power setup even fifty seven years
after the Partition. How colonialism affected the development of Indian society, for example
by transferring abroad massive surplus, crippling and indeed physically eliminating local
industry to create its own markets and how this led to massive poverty are all absent from
our discourse. There is no emphasis on the economic exploitation and social
disempowerment of the people by the colonizing power, probably since much of the pattern
of disempowerment and exploitation remains in place even today, with the substitution of the
locals for the foreigners.

Communalization

As briefly mentioned above, a noticeable point is the way the communal question comes to
dominate the description of the struggle for independence in our books. It is astonishing to
find that the whole emphasis of our books is to show that it was a struggle, on the part of the
Muslims, against an impending “Hindu domination” rather than a struggle of a people
(Hindus, Muslims & others) against a colonizing power. This theme starts with the projection
of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan as a person who awakened Muslims to the needs of the modern
times and laid the basis of Muslim nationalism and culminates in projecting the Quaid as a
theocrat striving to enforce the Shariah. What is missing noticeably from this discussion is
that there were many prominent Muslim nationalists such as Maulana Azad who were in the
75

The Subtle Subversion: The state of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

vanguard of the freedom struggle and were strongly opposed to the idea of partition. The
Muslims are presented as a monolithic block. What is absent are the echoes of the other
Muslim voices in the evolution of Muslim political nationalism. Many Muslims, including
leading theologians, were opposed to Partition while many others were uninterested in it. In
the interest of historical accuracy it is important to show the students that neither the
Muslims nor the Hindus formed a homogeneous block. There were multiple voices on both
sides that should be included. However the internal differences and dissenting voices are
absent from our texts making them very regimented and fractured184. At least at the
relatively more mature level of the Intermediate, students can deal with the complexity of
history and by all rights it ought to be there.

It is important to include these events and personalities objectively and to discuss the pros
and cons of the respective arguments. This would enable the student to develop a sense
that political and ideological differences are not necessarily borne out of the spite of one
party but are often a natural outcome of differing social, economic and political backgrounds.
This could contribute to strengthening a culture of tolerance and democracy within our
society and possibly a lessening of enmity with our neighbors, the Indians.
Contemporary Issues
While our textbooks are replete with mention of the Quaid and his struggle to achieve
Pakistan, it is equally noticeable by its omission that nowhere do the texts emphasize his
highly liberal, democratic and tolerant worldview. His speech of 11th August 1947 to the
Constituent Assembly in which he laid down the outlines of a democratic and secular
Pakistan in which the state has no concern with the religion of its citizens and all irrespective
of faith, are fully equal, finds no mention at any level. We also fail to mention the practical
expression of this mindset in that the first Cabinet of the country that he founded had a
Hindu as the Law Minister and an Ahmedi as the foreign minister. We do so presumably
because it does not fit in with the fiction which we wish to perpetuate: that what he had
conceived was an Islamic state and not simply a Muslim majority state. In the same vein all
those non-Muslims who contributed to the educational, social and humanitarian development
of what is now Pakistan are not to be found anywhere in our textbooks. While the
educational institutions, hospitals and parks etc they founded still stand as reminders of their
spirit of human service they are persona non-grata as far the textbooks go. The non-Muslims
who served this country after 1947 fare no better. Whether it be a great scientist such as
Prof. Abdus Salam or an eminent Jurist such as A. R. Cornelius or a military hero such as
Cecil Chowdhry or many others who made important contributions to towards this country,
they find no honorable mention anywhere. These omissions strengthen the contempt and
biases against non-Muslims, which the entire educational system sets out to achieve, in the
name of developing an Islamic identity.

However it is not just the non-Muslim heroes and outstanding personalities who are
conspicuous by their absence. Even more starkly evident is the fact that the contemporary
heroes (heroines) of civil society, whether national or international, Muslim or non-Muslim,
individuals or institutions, all are completely missing from our textbooks. There are no
scientists, artists, social workers, journalists, statesmen mentioned. There is a silence as far
as projecting the achievements of the civil society is concerned. The only contemporary
heroes our children are told about are military heroes. While one does not intend to belittle
the sacrifices of those who died fighting for this country, it is equally if not more important to
project and describe those who lived to make this a better country. The exclusion of heroes
184 e.g. Intermediate Classes - Civics of Pakistan, Page 19 Author: Mazhar-ul-Haq. Fourth Impression, 2000.
Bookland
76
Omissions that Could Have Been Enriching

from civil society creates the impression that there were no civilians worthy of mention or
worthy of being presented as role models or inspirational figures for children. It further
strengthens the military’s claim to be the savior of the nation and its superiority to the
members of the civil society. There are probably several reasons for the exclusion of
contemporary figures one of them being the general unwillingness to present any event or
person except in terms of “total good” or “total evil”. Any public figure who is controversial in
any sense is thus to be excluded. Most major figures of our times obviously fall short of such
unrealistic standards often for reasons unrelated to their contributions but vested in their
religious or political beliefs or personal idiosyncrasies.

It is very significant that our textbooks maintain a very strict separation between economics
and politics and suppress any development of a social critique. This is as correct both with
respect to the local power distribution as it is with respect to the international financial
institutions. e.g. texts on Civics185 devote a chapter to the natural resources of the country.
However there is absolutely no discussion of the implications of the distribution of economic
resources in society, the effects of unequal access to opportunities and resources on the
lives of individuals, groups and provinces. Nor is there any discussion of the state’s
responsibility to ensure a fair distribution of resources between the provinces, classes and
genders etc.

In the same context, i.e. the responsibilities of a state to provide for its citizens, while the
section on income and expenditure mentions taxation books mention taxation (Pages 97 to
99) there is no discussion of why people pay taxes, what they should receive in return and
whether the state meets its obligations.. Nor do the texts discuss whether the money being
spend correctly by the government or whether its priorities are the correct ones. This would
not only include citizen rights but also the state’s duties to its citizens; how is public money
taken and spent; who pays and who uses it, etc.

Conclusion
We have outlined above some of the main themes that we believe have been selectively and
systematically omitted from our textbooks, mostly for narrow sighted ideological reasons and
not for academic or pedagogical reasons. We have also attempted at places to identify the
specific outcome of such omissions in terms of the mindset and worldview that they generate
by the failure to expose student to a humanizing and liberalizing intellectual atmosphere. We
believe that the growth of intolerance, fundamentalism and extremism while having many
other fundamental sources is however strengthened bby such curricula and textbooks,
operative in the very large public school system.

There is one final aspect to which we draw attention in the context of omissions: this relates
to formation of a personality that respects differences and allows debates. By presenting
human reality, whether historical, political or social, as having one unique interpretation to be
found in one particular paragraph of one particular textbook our books make a mockery of
the whole notion of learning as understood in our times. The system as a whole has this
fundamental weakness in that critical thinking analysis and difference of opinions is not
allowed to be developed as a natural activity in learning. This is in itself the most
fundamental conceptual omission inherent in the entire system and needs to be addressed
in a mature manner so as to produce a generation for which learning comes to be
recognized as a means of acquiring the tools of understanding and not merely as a process
of accumulating information.

The above articles is a part of book which was written by a pakistani educational commission to revise the curricula of books (taught in pakistan)..

This commission was working under General Musharraf.

The books covers all the flaws in the edcuation curricula which have been prevalent since 1977(Zia )

I dont have any motive to defame pakistan or its policy by posting this article and i hope people who are reading this book will take it in right sense......

if someone wants to read the full book:

its available on :
http://www.sdpi.org/whats_new/reporton/State%20of%20Curr&TextBooks.pdf

Rigour against communal dogma

Issue: 109
Posted: 3 February 06
Talat Ahmed
bq. A review of Romila Thapar, Somanatha: The Many Voices of a History (Verso, 2005), £17

On 6 December 1992 the Babri Mosque at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh, north India, was demolished by a mob organised by the Bharati Janata Party (BJP). This was the ruling party of India from March 1998 until May 2004. The BJP was led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L K Advani, both members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a communalist organisation that promotes the notion of India as a ‘Hindu’ nation. From this stems a
pernicious ideology, ‘Hindutva’, which calls for a ‘return’ to Hindu values based on sacred Sanskrit texts.

The mosque was destroyed on the supposed belief that it was built on the site of a temple that had been desecrated by the Mughal Muslims and, moreover, is the birthplace of Ram, a Hindu god. Two years before, Advani began his infamous journey to Ayodhya from the port city of Somnath in Gujarat. The choice was
significant as the Somnath temple was subjected to a raid by a Muslim overlord from Afghanistan at the beginning of the 11th century. This is taken as proof of Islamic zeal, demagogy and intolerance in the face of a passive Hindu majority.

The Hindutva creed promotes an account of India’s past that is homogenous, monolithic and unmistakeably Hindu. All other religious and cultural traditions within India are viewed as at best marginal or inferior. In particular Islam is viewed with suspicion and presented as an alien and destructive force in Indian culture.
While the BJP was in power attempts were made to rewrite the history curriculum and in 2001 the Indian Educational Council began deleting certain passages from school textbooks.

One person who has questioned this ‘Hinduised’ version of history is the eminent Indian historian Romila Thapar. She has written extensively on Early India, documenting the myriad traditions,
languages and practices that have characterised Indian civilisation.1 Her refusal to bow down before communalist dogma has led to her being vilified by the Hindutva brigade in the US and India. She has been accused of treason and the denigration of Hinduism. In November 1999 she was ‘retired’ from the Prasar
Bharati Board in the BJP’s opening salvo to ‘saffronise’ key institutions, and in 2001 Hindutva ideologues demanded that she
be arrested.

Undaunted, Thapar has continued to research into different aspects of Indian history, employing diverse sources which she interrogates with rigour. This excellent book focuses on the raid of a temple in Somnath, Gujarat, in 1026. Thapar does not call into question the event itself. Instead her work probes how the event has been interpreted and remembered.

The temple in question was a Hindu shrine and the raid was orchestrated by a Muslim overlord from Afghanistan. This raid was undertaken by Mahmud of Ghazni, who is claimed to have come to India at the beginning of the 11th century as a conquering Turk and whose armies looted the temple, broke the idol inside and finally destroyed the temple structure in an act of religious frenzy against the infidel Hindus. This event has come to
represent a rupture in Indian civilisation with the first ‘invasion’ of an alien presence in India, that of Muslims. It is also taken as the root cause of Hindu-Muslim antagonism on the subcontinent and all subsequent history is to be understood and interpreted accordingly.

The evidence for this is taken from Turko-Persian sources, many of which were composed during Mahmud’s life, and their chroniclers were members of the Ghazni court. So there are the lyrical eulogies composed by the court poet, Farrukhi Sistani, who is claimed to have accompanied Mahmud on his expedition to Somnath.2 Similarly, later accounts of the raid focus on the quantity of wealth that was taken but also praise Mahmud for
destroying the idol and bringing the ‘true’ faith into India.3 These tend to exaggerate the amount of booty taken and are full of
embellishments about the extent of the raid and the size and importance of the temple.

As the centuries progress, new narratives are composed to describe other sultans conducting more raids on the site,
destroying the idol yet again and building a mosque on the remnants of the demolished temple. As Thapar states, with each account fantasy and glorification of the exploits of reigning sultans multiplied as revisions were made to earlier narratives reflecting contemporary demands.4 Despite the lack of coherency and logic
these narratives have been accepted as the authoritative version of events and their re-telling has crystallised notions of the ‘Hindu’ as the injured party and the ‘Muslim’ as the invading zealous defender of Islam.

This version was accepted by colonial narratives as it conveniently fitted their periodisation of Indian history into three
distinct phases: Ancient=Hindu; Medieval=Muslim; Modern=colonial. This arbitrary division allowed colonial officials of the early 19th century to emphasise hostility between Hindus and Muslims and in some cases present themselves as the protectors of Hindu culture.5

The subject of the raid and its apparent traumatic impact on the Hindu psyche was brought up in the House of Commons in 1843 by Lord Ellenborough who claimed that the gates of Somnath had been taken as a trophy by Mahmud to Ghazni and had to be returned by force in order to restore Hindu pride. The gates were brought back only to be found to contain no evidence of Indian
workmanship and so they are locked up in some storeroom in the Agra Fort to avoid further embarrassment (pp172-173). These
assumptions and prejudices were used by the colonial state to categorise Indians into their neat census surveys and present
Indian history as one characterised by permanent conflict between two irreconcilable and distinct communities.

In interrogating this version of history Thapar not only questions the sources such assumptions are based on but also looks to other material from the period in order to gain a fuller picture of events. The real power of her book is her use of Sanskrit sources. Hindutva ideologues claim Sanskrit to be the root of all Indian languages (so Urdu is conveniently excluded for its Perso-Arabic script and vocabulary). As such Sanskrit texts are
accepted as the unquestioned orthodoxy on Indian culture and civilisation. They are claimed to be authentic, indigenous and ‘pure’. However, what Thapar finds in these sources reveals a very different account of the Somnath temple incident and a fascinating picture begins to emerge.

She shows how the area around Somnath was an active and thriving centre of trade and commerce. It was the heart of sea
trade linking the Persian Gulf port towns with Goa and Cambay in South India and Somnath as the port in Gujarat. Consequently, city states and regional kingdoms developed as trade expanded
and various temples were built to provide places of worship for pilgrims and as reflections of the importance of a place and its ruler or benefactor (pp22-24, 28-29). Taxes were collected from pilgrims and were a lucrative source of wealth for any kingdom. As trade declined and rival rulers fought over the wealth, raids were a systematic feature of the region.

The evidence for this is provided in Sanskrit sources such as inscriptions and texts, which reveal that looting by local rajas was a recurring pattern—this would include attacks upon temples (pp78-79). Early Buddhist texts such as biographies and chronicles by Jaina scholars depict regular confrontations between rival religious sects of Jainas and followers of Shiva. The temple becomes a contested site for Shiva and Buddha iconography and the texts exhort the superiority of Jainism over the older Vedic beliefs (pp109-111).

Conspicuous by its absence in these sources is any mention of the Somnath raid or, if it is mentioned, it is one raid among several, not worthy of any specific merit. These findings lead Thapar to conclude that this episode did not signify a trauma so great that it continues to wound Hindus today. Many inscriptions
from the 12th century refer to the decline of the Somnath temple as stemming from its age, mismanagement and lack of
maintenance (pp82-83). If there was a decline in pilgrims and traders this would explain its deterioration.

There is also a wide range of bilingual inscriptions dating from the 13th century which are in Sanskrit and Arabic. One shows a local raja, Sri Chada, granting a ship owner and trader from Hormuz land on the estates of the temple in order to build a mosque (pp84-87). The local ruler made provisions for the maintenance of
the mosque and provided generously for teachers, daily worship, the reading of the Koran and celebration of festivals. What is
more, these inscriptions show no evidence of animosity as a consequence of the raid on Somnath (pp87-92).

At the local level, popular ballads from the 13th and 14th centuries narrate stories of saints who were and still are revered by Hindus and Muslims alike (pp147-150). Thapar’s work shows how temple desecration preceded the arrival of Islam to India. Moreover, when Mahmud returned to Ghazni he is reported to have attacked an Ismaili Muslim ruler causing much devastation in Sind. In Multan, the Ismaili mosque was attacked by Mahmud
and replaced with a Sunni one, but when the ruler retracted from his conversion to Sunni Islam Mahmud’s armies again
attacked the town, this time murdered all the Ismaili Muslims (pp48-51). In the process of this raid Mahmud acquired greater wealth.

This demonstrates the hostility of Sunni Islam to sects of Ismailis, Shias and Sufis, who were all seen as heretics. As Thapar
argues, there was no homogenised Muslim identity in this period any more than a fully formed, fixed, exclusive Hindu entity. Hindutva ideologues glorify Sanskrit knowledge and literature as
representing the ‘true’ Hindu/Indian history. The fact that no major source of this type paints the incident as an epic of
conquest or resistance for any homogenised grouping in itself proves the fallacy of Hindu communalism.
Thapar locates ideas of religion within a complex, nuanced narrative that incorporates political power, access to economic resources, and a mixing of cultural traditions in addition to religious iconography. Her work demonstrates how there were many layers of interaction, accommodation and integration in this
period and she articulates most eloquently how reductive, crude and ahistorical fixed notions of religious identity were to early
and medieval India.

This has immense relevance today. Not only was the temple rebuilt in 1951 based on the spurious claims to have occupied a
special ‘hurt’ for Hindus, but the idea of temple desecration by Muslims is used by the BJP and its Hindutva acolytes to
marginalise and oppress Muslims. It is also used to create a mythological community of Hindus that is far from reality. Thapar
has done a great service in sifting through a range of historical sources to challenge accepted versions. We should admire
Thapar for her courage and also salute her dogged commitment to academic rigour, honesty and refusal to bow before
communalist hatred.

look I was not a good student at all, if I was then I wouldnt be sitting here arguing with you probably I would have been sitting in an office of microsoft etc.
The hatred for india came from the current affairs, and whatever is happening in kashmir and indian foreign policy, I cant remember of any text book references that developed hatred against india in my mind? so this organisation which is overseen by musharraf have got no credibility because musharraf have no credibility at all in Pakistan, if zia promoted islamisation then he has been promoting anti Islamisation. As I said in my previous posts dont give me the references of musharraf because there are only a handful of people who accept musharraf as president.

Last edited by ugwaraich on Sun Jan 27, 2008 7:56 pm; edited 1 time in total

i do accept that BJP tried a little to glorify hindus history and change NCERT.. but all were changed after congress came into power..they were removed befor they got published

NCERT controversy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) is an apex resource organisation set up by the Government of India, with headquarters at New Delhi, to assist and advise the Central and State Governments on academic matters related to school education. NCERT publishes books that are used in government and private schools across India that follow the CBSE curriculum.

The controversy centers around the charges of an attempted "saffronized" rewriting of Indian History (i.e., make lessons consonant with the Hindu world view)[1]. Allegations of historical revisionism with a Hindu nationalist agenda arose in two periods, under the Janata Party government 1977 to 1980, and again under the Bharatiya Janata Party government 1998 to 2004.

JP government

Prime Minister Morarji Desai suggested that the criticized textbooks be withdrawn combined with a campaign against an alleged "communist" infiltration of academic positions, resulting in a storm of controversy in the press and in parliament. R.S. Sharma's 1977 Ancient India was withdrawn from the syllabus by the Central Board of Secondary Education in July 1978. The most hotly contested issue in the 1977 to 1979 controversy was the depiction of Mughal era (Muslim ruled) India, and the role of Islam in India. Romila Thapar's Medieval India was criticised for being too sympathetic to Muslim viewpoints, and for showing too little enthusiasm for Hindu revivalism. In the course of the controversy, both sides became deeply suspicious of the other's motivations, contributing to the intensification of Indian "communalism" and leaving resentments that were to resurface in the renewed controversy under BJP rule twenty years later.

NDA government

In 2002, under the NDA government spearheaded by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) the government made an attempt at changing the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) school textbooks through a new National Curriculum Framework.[2] The changes made were deemed to be of the hindutva ideological leanings of the party, which were regarded as a narrow sectarian and Hindu chauvinist ideology (some media referred to it as "saffronization of textbooks").[2]. An op-ed column by Kal Friese in the New York Times also criticized this move[3]. The NDA governments term prompted criticism when it attempted to "saffronize" public education by raising the profile of Hindu cultural norms, views and historical personalities in school textbooks and portraying other religions in a negative light.[1]

The BJP opined that their only goal was to overhaul the stagnant and saturated institutions like NCERT and free them from the alleged dynastic control and hegemony of the Indian National Congress and the Communists.[4] Party members also opined that their goal was not to promote sectarianism, but present a more accurate picture of Indian history and Indian culture (such as Vedic science), which was being downplayed by the left wing ideologues[5].

UPA Government

The NDA was defeated in the elections of 2004 and the new UPA government pledged to "de-saffronize" textbooks and curricula nationwide and restore the secular character of education.[1] In March, the UPA Government released new NCERT textbooks, based on the texts used prior to the controversial 2002 updates.[1] The Ministry of Human Resource Development, which oversaw this project, stated that it had made only minor modifications to the books that predated the "saffronized" era.[1]

In Delhi, the Directorate of Education, in collaboration with the State Council of Educational Research and Training, prepared 47 new textbooks, and other state governments were expected to do likewise.[1] In June 2004, a panel constituted by NCERT reviewed the new textbooks and determined that they had poor content, shoddy presentation, and significant amounts of irrelevant information.[1] The panel recommended to the Human Resource Development (HRD) minister that the new books not be used until the defects could be resolved. resulting in Delhi students also using texts from the pre-"saffronized" period.[1]

Press reports indicated that the rush to "de-saffronize" school texts resulted in Urdu versions not being ready for the academic year, which began in April.[1] The reports asserted that this failure hurt Urdu-speaking students by depriving them of needed textbooks. The NCERT denied the claims.[1]

In turn, the BJP and the Hindu nationalists have accused the UPA and previous Congress-led governments of revising history to present a Marxist bias, and whitewashing the record of Muslim atrocities in order to acquire Muslim votes.[

In india no harm can be done to muslims..

there are party:

CPI,CPM,SP and Congress(biggest party ) who favour them and want the vote bank

and there was some change in 2002 but it was removed after BJP lost to congress and it wasnt even published .....so books remained same

and i ll tell u personally...india history have more stress on medieval period which is moughal period and slave,khilzi,lodi dynasty

but we are indians first and we respect all rulers who ruled india and they are part of hindustan ,what IRAN called us since BC

As long as Kashmir is not independent I cannot say that India is a true state.
Now, that doesn`t mean at all that I hate hindu or India. Because if India is so democracy country
and following all the rules, then why not they let Kashmir be an independent state what they want
since 1946.

_________________
I do believe on Ghosts.

	@nline wrote:
	As long as Kashmir is not independent I cannot say that India is a true state. Now, that doesn`t mean at all that I hate hindu or India. Because if India is so democracy country and following all the rules, then why not they let Kashmir be an independent state what they want since 1946.

i dont need ur stamp on indias integrity and democratic track record.

Full world recognizes india to be largest democracy...........and everyone knows india is peaceful and follow some principles./

kashmir debate is not 1 day issue and it takes time2 solve such issues..it decides fate of india........

and i told u before 2 that kashmir is integral part of india...........

and why dont u talk about Tibet or kashmir which pakistan gave to china in 1962 ..

and there are many other such problems and big powers have some respect in world community...
hw can one think india will give away claim to kashmir..

AT max kashmir can remain autonomous but with in india

hi how r u

i love pakistan thats the bottom line