Facts O-level and facts low level

Urstruly:

Sorry, I won`t be able to share my thoughts on this subject in detail (Mainly due to time constraints, falling leaves, sunny days, oudoors, counting the number of times the water rises and falls on the shores of Atlantic, smelling the fresh breeze and etc). In lieu of that, I will like to share an affectionate poem written by a Native American Poet - Canuuk. It talks about a father`s advice to his son - on wisdom. Hope that will give another view.


To My Son

My Son,
you tell me how wise
you see me as being
but
what is wisdom
but knowledge
of lifes many changes.
This too,
you will know someday.

In the meantime,
take some advise
from one who`s lived through lifes valleys
and through lifes mountains.
Be true to Thyself-
depend on no one but you.

People will come
and people will go,
but you
are the only one
twill always be there-
good or bad,
right or wrong.
As long as you believe
your actions are right,
everything
and everyone
will be alright.

When you percieve something
to be worthwhile,
know it in your own heart
and it will be what you want.
Feel it,
with every thought you have,
and it will become so.

The only exception to this rule
is your belief
and faith in the Great Spirit.
For without belief
nothing is-
and without faith
nothing will be.

RE: HN

I have not seen you on any of the post …..but here is the US/Sudan settlement .. well it turns out that the case is still in court (US almost settled but Mr. Idris wants more!) .. well check it out

http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid%5F854000/854899.stm

Urstruly:

I will get back to your well written post soon. There are several aspects that require further exploration in your post.

[In terms of subscriptions, I INTENTIONALLY did not put ``Sarcasm Intended - in curly brackets,`` in my past post :-) Good Observation!

Thanks

RE: Rooster-Blue

Very well put, Sir. Sometimes the things ARE as simple as they seem to be.

Regards

Zahra!

You are asking the right questions from the wrong guy. I have more questions than answers. Since both of us are in the same boat lets try to refine our questions.

Your first question was whether wisdom goes along with vision and inspiration. The answer is both yes and no. Hitler had a vision and an inspiration but presence of wisdom can be argued. Probably wisdom is also a relative thing. Probably it is something like the saying , ``one man`s garbage is other man`s gold``. Is vice versa also true? What you know?

However I do believe that vision is always from with in. Take for example, Buddha; I don’t believe that he ever subscribed to TIME, History, or Newsweek. We don’t come across any account that he ever went to a library. He sat under that Banyan tree for years until he was ``blessed`` with a vision. I don’t believe that our Prophet (peace be upon him) ever read ``Seven Pillars of Wisdom``; or he read any of the worldly books because he couldn’t read. But he used to go to the cave named Thor to meditate and contemplate. That is where he was ``blessed`` with that ``vision``.

As far as, ``Perception`` is concerned I believe that it is just an interpretation of our stimuli that we sense through our 5+1 senses; and I mean it in all contexts whether philosophical, physiological, physical, psychological, metaphorical, or literal. This mechanism of ``interpretation`` is one of the most pathetic mechanisms that are working in human beings. The information that we receive filters through our prejudices, past experiences, knowledge base, emotions, and convictions. The resultant varies drastically from person to person. Even a simple observation like looking at a glass of water can have two interpretations-``Half-full`` or ``Half-empty``. Pathetic, ain`t it?

For years I yearned to be a visionary. I started with ``Ainaa Beenee`` (please don’t laugh). For some years I blamed my lack of vision on my Taqdeer. I used to think that I was just another character in Dante`s Divine Comedy. I also blamed A, C, T, and Gs of my genes until I came across what Hazrat Ali said to a man who asked him how much freedom Man has in the Universe. Hazrat Ali asked him to lift his leg. He did. Then he asked him to lift his other leg. The man said that he would fall down. Then Hazrat Ali said that, that was all the freedom Man has in the universe.

Since then, I believe in that one leg of mine that I can lift. It is my choice whether I want to walk or run but I will always have one foot on the ground. I read this couplet written on the back of a truck in Pakistan. Try to understand the depth of meaning in it:

``Rakho Nigah ko Buland keh yehi hay Nazria-e-Hayat
Raho Zameen Par magar baat aasman ki Karo.``

RE: Amit #55

I agree with the spirit of reply… India and Pakistan are not going anywhere they will be better off if they kiss and makeup rather than wasting their resources on claims of being better than the other… the core of the Pak-India relation is EGO … (from a very simple but true point of view) it is only bringing misery to the common man

About the India Arab/Muslim world relation… well your talking about two different scenarios here.. Pakistan is the ‘neighbor’ and former part of India .. with shared history and heritage .. the problem/relationship has grown complex. And it is always more bitter when you break off with some you known for so long as compare to some one who you had a Hello Hi relationship… For other countries (Muslim countries) there is no direct conflict of interest ( there is no Pan-Islamic movement !!!).. and Arabs have a very cold foreign policy .. make no mistake.. Arabs do not mix ideology with the state business … the corner stone of Arab foreign policies (in general) is to protect their own regimes and existence. Turks don’t even consider themselves as part of mainstream Muslim society … they are eager to shed their Asian and Muslim ids and become ‘European’ … (only be haunted centuries later as Bosnia .. remember who were they before being European?) …speaking of Arabs they don’t give a s….t about Kashmir except for ‘fundamentalists’ .. for them it’s a land dispute between two hostile neighbors .. which is not their problem!

Urstruly:

Well, reading your conclusion [a short and succinct - $$$ statement]I have few questions:-)

Ok - Here I go:-

1) Can we assume that the combination of vision and inspiration will result in a *wise human being *?

1a) Or wisdom has different constituents ?

2) In case, they are different then what are they or what should they be ?

3)Is perception part of a wisdom-personified individual? And/Or should it be ?

This question is in my mind for sometime and I`ve never found a clear answer. I detest reading theories on such concepts and prefer insightful interpretations. What`s most annoying - when you ask the question, you are told that you`ll get it with time. And I always question ---- WHEN ?
Ok, I partly know the answer to the ambiguity, but I just want to understand or read an insightful person`s approach.

?

Zahra #54

Well said Zahra. Allow me to add my two pennies here. The vision is always from within; a vision from without is called inspiration.

Regards

Re:Urstruly #53

We hindus are quite aware that we have lost 1150 years of history. The question is how do we go forward from here ? In order to build a decent country, we have to have reconciliation with 120 million muslims. We also need reconciliation with Pakistan since you guys are our neighbors. This requires that we need to establish a new relationship based on mutual respect, dignity and trust. Therefore, we need to focus on our shared heritage, culture and desi roots. We hindus are not trying to change your history. We are trying to find common ground from where we can build a new relationship for the future. The wise people in Pakistan realize that as well. After all, we cannot go on waving nuclear weapons at each other.

As muslims you must take pride in Islamic civilization and history. Don`t tell me that it is all about Ghaznavi and Ghouri. Take pride in the early muslim scientists and astronomers. Take pride in the great civilization at Baghdad and the just Islamic state. Instead of being addicted to Bollywood, why not develop your art, culture, literature, architecture etc. in line with finest Islamic civlizations ? If you admire the Moghuls, create beautiful monuments and gardens all over Pakistan. If you focus on the positive, we hindus will also share in that.

As far as Ghaznavi and Ghouri are concerned, it is despicable to see some Pakistanis celebrate them as heroes. Everyone, including Pakistanis, know that the vast majority of Pakistanis are descendents of desis rather than Turks or Tajiks. Hence, when you celebrate the destruction of hindus, you celebrate the destruction of your own ancestors as well. It is similar to an Indian christian worshipping General Dwyer for Jalianwala Bagh, simply because Dwyer was a christian who killed a lot of hindus and muslims that day. It is a peculiar desi habit of kicking our own people when they are down. During british rule, the westernised desis took special perverted pleasure in looking down on ordinary folks. No one in the world respects that. If you look at the Islamic world, every Islamic country has excellent relations with India and no one shares Pakistan`s animosity towards India. Ghaznavi`s homeland Turkey never talks about Ghaznavi or his exploits. Ghouri`s homeland of Tajikistan has excellent relations with India and would never insult India. Yet, it is the land of Punjabis and Sindhis in Pakistan, that lashes out at India and their fellow desis, in the name of Islam!! It is really a sad reflection on all of us.

Yes, we Indians were cowards and full of caste and superstition. That is why we lost. However, every civilization has its ups and downs. A thousand years back, muslims were on top and europeans were in the dark ages. Today europeans are on the top and the muslim world is lagging behind. It is all a matter of time. Just because hindus were decadent and disunited, does not mean that it will always remain that way. So instead of beating down on us, focus on your positives, and let us all try to be better human beings.

YLH (Post # 25):

I am amazed to read your interpretation of vision! I suggest `Business Week`/`Time`/`National Geographic`/`Psychology Today` for 6 months, before you pass your next random corollaries.
[Please let me know if you have any trouble finding them, I will be more than glad to assist]

Just to add some personal perspective to thy visionary mind -

Vision comes with experience, though the experience must entail enlightenment, illumination and education. As they say - Each experience is a teacher. Personally, I disagree with the word *each * here. I believe if an experience leaves a lasting, educating and enlightening impact, only then it is conducive to vision development and is worth respecting - as a teacher. In short, it has nothing to do with Matriculation/O-A Levels/Senior Cambridge/H.Sc.

It is all buried in an individual`s approach towards life - hard-work; persistence; ambitiousness; defined goals; passion to fulfil or work towards achieving ones aspirations; perseverance; faith in oneself; pragmatic approach; belief and prayers that lead to a visionary approach towards life not the much talked about elementary stuff. That *stuff * is only one of the initial milestones (be it matriculation or O-Levels) in the long run of life and not the ultimate. [I intentionally did not mention intelligence. I feel it is an inherent characteristic – I may be wrong in saying that or the % may differ from person to person]

Just to share a personal experience: - Out of my sheer love for Applied Calculus, as a fresh engineering graduate, I happened to teach the subject for a semester to A-Levels (in Lahore). My discoveries about `your visionaries` were very disappointing, though I would not generalize that for all.

Applying Newton’s 3rd law of motion: To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Similarly, to each intelligent investment in life [please consult the attributes addressed above] there is an equal and rewarding return. It`s just the matter of availing the opportunity.

Good Luck!

RE: CHEEMA

The nature of your response was anticipated-the tone and the content both. Most of your post echoes the same arguments that you presented earlier with a persistent insistence that your perception of the historical events are correct whereas everyone else is wrong. That only proves the point that history is dogmatic in nature and whenever there is a contest between dogma and reason, the dogma always wins. Establishing the fact that whose version of history is ``dogmatic`` and whose is ``reason`` is a never-ending discussion.

You presented two quotes from Quaid-e-Azam, without presenting the proper context. All this to prove your case that TNT elaborates the communal prejudices between the ``two nations``. If one takes the face value of those quotes then sure you can prove your case, but the fact is that the case can be proved in either way. So the quotes presented without proper context are like a knife, you can use this knife to kill another human being or you can use the same knife to help you in your kitchen. The following quote is from Quaid`s address on March 23, 1940, at Lahore when Pakistan Resolution was passed. This quote positively negates the ``communal`` nature of TNT.

``It has always been taken mistakenly that the Muslmans are a minority. The Musalmans are not a minority. The Muslmans are a nation by any definition……What the unitary government of India for 150 years has failed to achieve can not be realized by the imposition of a central federal government….except by means of armed force….The problem of India is NOT OF AN INTERCOMMUNAL character but manifestly of an INTERNATIONAL one, and it must be treated as such……The Muslims and Hindus belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly of on conflicting ideas and conceptions…..``
(``The Emergence of Pakistan``, Chaudri Muhammad Ali, P-39, and also quoted in ``Some Recent Speeches and Writings of Mr. Jinnah``, by Jamil-ud-din-Ahmad p173-78)

Now you can take above quote and you can make a case in either way-can`t you?

Most of your post is a classic example of the tactic called ``overwhelm with information tactic``. For example I did not understand your argument about ``that sect`` in the Chakwal which professes ``that idea``. I failed to make a connection with our on-going discussion. Similarly I did not understand the example of Moulana Modoudi. Your reference of Qurat-ul-Ain Haider is also incorrect and seems to be based on the ``popular myth``. I recommend that you read the preface of her book ``Aag ka Darya``. There she explains the reasons of not accepting the Aadamji Award. She clearly states in her own words that everybody including herself were thoroughly convinced that she would win the award; and everybody kept on telling her that. But as a protest against Ayub`s Martial Law she volunteered her name as a Judge, instead, and that automatically disqualified her from the contest to win the award. Mr. Cheema! I give you a benefit of doubt here and refrain from the quote that, ``honesty is the best policy``, since nobody is perfect.

I was kind of hoping that the argument of Sufis and Tasawaf would come from AD first, but it was anticipated that you would use it too. I really doubt that your Hindu friends share the same perception with you. If they accept that Islam was spread in sub-continent due to these Sufis and Saints I promise that I will re-consider my stand on Ghaznavi. How is that bargain, AD? Cheema?

Have you ever wondered why Hindus insist on changing our History, Cheema? Let me be very blunt here. The history of subcontinent is not just a story of two civilizations but it is a story of conqueror and the conquered. One civilization did dominate the other for 1000 years. Everywhere else in the world, it is fine with everyone. Even our masters the British were once dominated by Romans- they got over it, Muslims in subcontinent were subjugated for 150 years they got over it. But the problem with Hindus is different. They have a caste system where there is a class that has a birthright to be elite. They mostly form the aristocracy. If they accept the history as it is then they will have to explain their compliance with invaders and their cowardice for 1000 years to their fellow hindus of the lower castes. That is the reason they present invaders as monsters so that they can hide their face and still maintain their social status as a superior class. That explains their contention about forced conversions and denial of any role on part of Sufis.

On a side note I would recommend my Hindu friends to reconsider their insistence on changing the history. You lost 1150 years from your history, you have to come to terms with this fact. We lost 150, Malaysians lost 700 years. That is the world we live in. Times have changed. You can still be proud of a lot of things. Consider yourselves as pioneers in a new land where you started living in 1947. Take pride in your achievements-your democracy, sastaining a system that feeds one billion people, your recent advances in IT and most of all you got rid of the religion that got you in that mess in the first place. Remeber, your demons of the past will be as big as you let them be.

The TNT was not a divine doctrine based on religious injunctions. That is the reason a good number of Muslims disagreed with it. They did believe the Congress version that it is possible to live with Hindus. They even chose to live in India after partition. Incidentally, it is worth noting that the greatest support for Pakistan came from the provinces and states where Muslims were a minority and that those provinces did not have any chance to be included in Pakistan. What does it tell you? Anyway the proponents of TNT won in 1947 and they got a new homeland. They have every god-given-right to justify and support their version of history. It is an accepted standard throughout the world.

As for your argument on Globalists and apologists I invite you to go through my article ``Chowk-e-Bay Roz Garan and Globalization`` (currently on the main forum) where I have explained the reasons why certain ``groups`` aka NGOs in Pakistan are insisting on re-writing history. I will really appreciate your objective analysis of the article.

At least we agree on one thing that is we have correctly identified the people who are denying the Pakistan its dream of being a socially just state.

PS. For rest of your post I agree with KRashid`s response except the part where he presents the Chinioti and Memon Interests in Pakistan. That may be considered a subset of the whole and not the superset per se.

Cheema #50

First of all your article is excellent, although I might not agree to it.

If you had given the original in Punjabi, Urdu, Sindhi of your translation, it would make it more interesting.

The struggle for Pakistan, is a very short struggle. In 1928 or 1930 when Allama Iqbal first presented the idea of state comprising of Muslim majority area in North West of India or when Rahmat Ali presented his theory and name Pakistan in 1930 or so, nobody took it serious enough to start a struggle. In fact Pakistan was basically nowhere, till the Congress rule between 1937- 39. Which was an eye opener for Muslims, regarding their treatment in a predominantly Hindu rule. Muslims wanted to safeguard their interest whether in United or divided India.

In that background around 1939 the real movement for Pakistan started.

If you see the economics of that period, where in Punjab, and Sind most of the Capital was concentrated in non-Muslim hands.

And according to Dr. Feroz, the newly accumulated Chinioti and Bombay Muslim capital, find in Pakistan a great opportunity.

The same can be said regarding people who were living in current part of India. So it was basically an opportunity, for the people living in current Pakistan, the people who migrated and people with capital. Now the only common ground between all these different people was that they were Muslims. With such a good opportunity and with real or perceived threat of Hindu domination, it became a movement of Muslims of sub-continent or Two Nation theory.

But basically it was the economics which was rolling this movement and not the religion. It can be judged by the fact that almost all the leaders of Muslim League were secular in approach, and some like Jogander Nath Mandal were non-Muslims. It is also substantiated by fact that most of the religious parties including Jamat-e-Islami, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and religious scholars were very much anti Pakistan. Because they did not think that it is a religious movement. Due to the short tenure of Pakistan movement, there was not a grass root leadership (compared to Congress).

And after partition, the government was quickly snached by Beaureaucracy cum Army.

That is in short is the Pakistan movement. We are still in the process of realizing that dream of Pakistan movement.

I can remember, from 1970 onwards. And I think, that politically we have advanced much in last 30 years.

There is more consciousness regarding provincial rights, more consciousness regarding establishment etc. Most important of which is routing of religious parties from big cities (meaning people at least in big cities look beyond religion on politics)

The drawback in all these years, has been that middle class has failed to provide an effective leadership. Although People`s Party and Awami League started the trend in 1970, but it was snatched right away by establishment in 1977.

Now the middle class leadership is where.

1- Mohajir Qaumi movement: As you should be knowing, that whatever people will think about MQM, they will again vote for it.

2- Religious parties like Jamat-e-Islami, Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam, Pakistan Awami tehrik etc.

So our politics is dominated by not only feudals, but feudal and industrialist alliance, in the form of Muslim League, and People`s Party.

To cut it short, we still have a long way to go. But the target should be a prosperous people of Pakistan.

All these like Ghaznavi hero or villian etc are diversions.

Like why is holocaust, so terrible that even pope has to apologize. While jews have been persecuted, in Spain, Jerusalem etc with almost as much ferocity as holocaust in this century.

My dear, don`t look anything beyond economics. If economics determine, a Hindu will be your friend, and a Muslim enemy and vice versa.

EST Reply #: 50

cheema

--Your post, brings out all the points that I wanted to say, beautifully. As I have been trying to explain, History teaches us mistakes of our past, that should not be repeated. If we start feeling proud of every aspect of our history, how do stop ourselves, from imitating those that we felt proud of.

Sati, dowry etc are traditional problems in Hinduism. They have been responsible for many deaths and suffering. Probably when they were devised there was some valid reason for that, but today, they do not server any purpose. Consequently, as a rational human, I denounce such a practise.

If I were to start glorifying it, how would we stop uneducated people from practicing such customers. When Urstruly glorifies Ghaznavi, he indirectly encourages uneducated muslims to ape Ghaznavi.

AD

Dear Urstruly (and Krashid),

You believe that TNT is not so limited in its approach as to differentiate the Muslims and Hindus on the basis of such petty differences as calender, hero or life style; and that whoever says so is an apologist, globalist,... etc.

Well you are in for a big surprise, on the first page of Pakisyan studies book of class 9th and 10th ( Urdu language, published by Punjab Text Bookboard) is a quote from Quaid e Azam M A Jinnah saying that we Muslims (compared to Hindus) have a distinct culture, civilization, language and art, naming system, moral and legal system, customs and rites, calendars, history and traditions, natural abilities ans objectives.

On page 179 of the same book, in an interview to a British `Nicholas` M A Jinnah talks about the role of religion in shaping Muslim nationalism, ``our history, heroes, art, music, style of architecture, laws are completely different from Hindus. WE AND HINDUS HAVE INFACT NOTHING IN COMMON. Our names, dress, food, economic system, humane attitude with the animals, etc. evertything is different from theirs. For example Hindus worship the cow and we eat its meat.``

This is the idealogy of Pakistan written quite prominently at the start and end of our matric Pakistan Studies textbooks. Now look who`s being apologetic, eh? How can you buy all that stuff and talk about secularism, social justice and dispelling the prejudices in the same breath.

The parallel history passing by word of mouth from one generation to another, well you have striked the nail on its head. If you care to listen to that parallel history you are in for another surprise. Tassauf and Sufi saints for centuries are the biggest influence on the minds of our people, they lived among the common people, spoke their language and bore the same sufferings and hardships as common people. Tassauf is at 180

degrees opposite to the concept of distinction between humanity on the basis of colour, creed and religion. One of the basic philosophies of Tassauf is ``unity in diversity``. The kind of relgious equality between common folks in old times can be discerned by a sufi verse you commonly hear in our villages (my own translation):

``Tear down the mosque, tear down the temple, tear down whatever you can

But don`t tear down the people`s hearts as my God lives in people`s hearts``

Their concept of religion is of devotion and love to the humanity, regardless of difference of colour, creed, religion. Tassauf in our part of world is in fact a mixture of Indian soil and culture with Islamic traditions. Urs, millad are not derived from Arab`s Islam, concept of Wahdat ul Wujud goes as far back as nirvana of Mahatama Buddh. Bulleh Shah, Shah Hussein, Waris Shah, Baba Farid, Shah Abdul Latif Bhatai all taught the people to rise above the petty religious differences and spread the message of love.

Bulleh Shah said in a poem:

``If you know the truth then why do you quarrel

Ram, Rahim and Mola are all but the same thing``

Shah Hussein spent all his life making sacrifices and devotion for his Hindu friend Maddhu Lal.

These sufi saints and their poetry is read by our people with a religious devotion. Baba Farid and Bulleh Shah are revered on both sides of the border.

Compare this all with the language of TNT, just because of different calendars, heroes, dresses, foods and naming system we cant live together. ``Hindus and Muslims have not a single thing in common``, yar do some justice, it seems Hindus are not even humans. Our classic poetry is rich in tassauf, wisdom can be found in our part of the world too, we unnecessarily take every observation and ideaosyncracy of white folk as sacred revelation.

When you say that a select German population or KKK doesn`t believe in holocaust, well your own contention about the history being a relative thing and being a party in a clash between two nations/ religions you are bound to defend your side by hook or crook ( I don`t completely agree with you) entitles them to do so. For your information, there is a certain militant Sunni sect established in Chakwal, I happened to read some of their literature ad it said that battle between Hazrat Imam Hussein and Yazid has no historical background and Shias have devised this story to gain sympathy from muslim brethren. I am certain you don`t have this in mind but your (or West`s) logic can lead to this end. So more impotaant than defending your side, country, religion, nation at all cost, give preferance to whether justice is being done to the issue at hand, otherwise there will be no criteria for morality or reasoning. If you justify Ghaznavi`s deeds by saying that he was just meeting the challenges of time, then you don`t have the right to object to Serbians` barbarity with Bosnians, Israeli`s usuruption of Palestinians` rights or human rights` abuses by Indian BSFs in Kashmir. Parameters of right and wrong are true for every human being and belonging to a certain religion or community doesn`t absolve us of this. The most difficult thing is to accept your fault. We as Muslims have the habit to glorify our past, exaggerate our achievements and not mention the failures. This sense of false conceit has ruined Muslim Ummah, when Maulana Maudidi wrote the book ``Khilafat aur Mulukiat`` he was branded as Jewish agent because he criticised some of the doings of Khulufa e Rashideen, (Maudidi also critized Ghaznavi`s adventures as not part of a Jihad but called them looting and pludering, now please don`t accuse him of being apologist too). Same is the case with TNT it is a considered a threat to national interest when somebody talks against TNT, Pakistan`s most critically accliamed novelists Qurratul Ain Haider and Abdullah Hussein have never received official award or appreciation because of their refernces to Muslim League`s politics of religious hatred and elitism hidden beneath it. Yes sir, beneath the Hindu bashing is a hidden motive of our ruling class to divert people`s attention from real issues. The concept of a common rival helps in acheiving unity (although temporary) within the country. Our Armed forces have felt positively threatened whenever there are signs of normalising of ties with India, because this would change the status quo of our Army too! No wonder our armed forces have taken the responsibility to defend geographical as well was idealogical borders. Salvation of whole country lies in conquering Kashmir they say, not a word have they have uttered agaist scourge of fundamentalism. Gen (retd) Hamid Gul in a recent article in Daily Jang has said that the people of southern Punjab and rural Sind have suffered too much under feudalicm for last 50 years, now its enough, they should join Jihad in Kashmir and thus raise their social and economic status (HA!).

There arer quite a few columnists in our English dailies who are hell bent to prove that all the hype about feudalism is a myth as practiacally there are no feudals left in the country. Their information is only paryially correct, despite being very few in number, in our assemblies there can be seen 80 percent feudals and according to ADBP`s press release 85 per cent of its loan meant for agricultural development has been eaten up by big feudal lords. In fact feudalicm has been the root cause in hindering spread of education, democracy and industrialization in the country.

My friend one of the mishaps with this country has been dishonest and corrupt intellectuals, in order to defend their class, status quo or any other vested interest, they shamelessly distort the facts and create their own history. It reminds one of Orwell`s ``1984``. So please rethink your contention about history as a totally relativistic business and keep faith in truth and justice.

Reply #: 46

Urstruly

--I guess, we should agree to disagree. I believe that History is an interpertation of the past. By changing how we look at the past, does not mean we are changing the past.

The reason why I mentioned Germany is because the govt is legally bound to accept that Germany commited crimes against humanity. Can you imagine, the kind of will it takes for a nation, to accept such a fact ? To counter this you cited the examples of the Neo-Nazis/skinheads etc, who believed in Hitler and the 3rd Reich. HOwever, I find these examples to be trival. Because there is a HUGE difference between the beliefs of some fringe groups, and the belief of the govt. If the govt of Germany, were to revoke the law, then I could accept your argument that people invent a parallel history.

In India, there are some incidents of bride burining, and its all over the papers. Then people from across the border, form an opinion about Hinduism, the Indian govt, the people of India etc, by just one isolated incident. (The fact is that the govt. has banned this practice. It is illegal.)

However, in Pakistan, the state itself promotes or at least condones actions that are openly anti-human rights. Blasphemy is a good example. So is infidelity. People in Pakistan are becoming intolerant of others, simply because they choose to interpret Ghaznavis actions as something to be proud of.

Like you said... its not fair to judge Ghaznavi, by our present values.... is it fair to implemt values prevelant in his time, today ?

AD

Ad #44

In refuting, two nation theory, you are giving example of Bengali Nationalism, Punjabi, Sindhi, and Baluch Nationalism.

Don`t you think that these sub-nationalities not only strengthens the concept of two nation theory, but effectively refutes One nation theory.

Do you think I need to elaborate.

AD# 44
Dear AD,

You Said ``, when the present contradicts ``history`` then don`t you think its time to reconsider?``

When the present contradicts past the only thing that can be changed is future. History tells us where we are coming from and present tells us where we are going or where we should go; re-writing history is a bad idea as discussed, period.

The judge`s decision in the Shah Bano case was unconstitutional. The Constitution of India inherited the Muslim Personal Law from the British. I am glad that Indians have upheld at least this part of the constitution. This is really commendable. On a side note, referring to your earlier post, the Muslims living in West do have a problem with the ``non-Muslim`` laws that effect their social values. I am aware of the efforts that are being made in England to separate the Muslim family law; whereas in North America geographical dispersion is a problem that has prevented such efforts or at least I am not aware of them if such efforts are being done.

We have already discussed that the cause of nationalism is promised but undelivered Social Justice, whereas your contention that it is because of culture and language is also correct. The later, however, are a subset or just one of many aspects of the Social Justice. Social Justice is a very comprehensive subject which include not only law but also economics, distribution of resources, education and employment opportunities, business, trade, bureaucracy, and almost everything that a welfare state stands for along with individual cultures and languages. It is naïve to suggest that TNT would have made people ignore their rights- even suggesting such a thing is ridiculous.

I didn’t understand your argument about Germany, whereas I was mentioning the allies` sanctions that were imposed on Germany after its defeat in WWI. Anyway, I hope you are aware of the presence of a parallel history that is being written even today that plainly denies the occurrence of Holocaust. Just check any of KKK, white pride, or The Invisible Empire websites to get a list of such books whereas I have also come across several books by so-called ``Nazi Sympathizers`` who are not categorized as ``racist`` per se.

``Water World``

I really appreciate your analysis of the books that are teaching our youth in Pakistan and indeed anywhere in South Asia.

Is India mentioned once in these texts?--you didn`t say.

I don`t know what students in other parts of South Asia are learning about our region. My sense is that the focus in on nation, not region.

Thanks -- I learned a lot

from your piece.

ussa

NYC

Reply #: 42

Urstruly

``

The kind of Social Justice that Muslim leadership and people believed at that time was not possible with Hindu majority.

``

-- I can even agree with your contention, that history is different for different people. However, when the present contradicts ``history`` then don`t you think its time to reconsider ?

TNT was based on 2 nations... Hindu nation and muslim nation. The contention was that Hindus and muslims cannot live together. The seperation of Bangladesh exposed the first fault. You are wrong when you say that Sindhism, Punjabism etc are off shoots of the TNT. As Bangladesh shows, its the culture/langauge that is more important than religon. SO Jinnah`s theory goes down the dump on that account. Much as you would like to believe in the muslim Ummah... its not as strong as the cultural/language bonds.

Secondly, you need to come to INdia, and see wether muslims get social justice or not. As far as citizens of India are concerned there are 2 categories.... Muslims and the rest.

If you are a muslim, you are dictated by the muslim laws and those laws cannot be disputed in any court. The Supreme Court of India tried that in the Shah Bano alimony case, and the govt of India came out with a new law... which in effect nullified the judgement of the court.

So there again... the speculation that muslims in India would not get fair treatment... social justice... falls flat on its face.

Why go further from home... in your own backyard see how one sect of muslims treat the others... the Punjabis don`t get alongwith the Sindhis who in turn fight with the Ahmadis etc.

The point I am trying to make by citing the above is that you are being faced with a reality which is mocking your version of history. Given that... don`t you think its foolish to still cling to that history ?

Finally, not all nations color their past, to glorify themselves. In Germany it is a federal offense if a German denies the existence of the Holocaust. It takes a big heart of accept the fault of ones ancestors and learn from their mistakes instead of blindly following in their foot steps.

AD

AD# 41

Dear AD,

I hope my response#42 to Cheema will answer most of your questions. Please feel free to drop in a couple of lines to let me know if it didnt.

Dear Cheema!

The idea of re-writing history or putting a ``right`` perspective in it is fundamentally flawed. It has happened many times in the history and each and every time it bred more contempt than before. Consider, e.g. Marshal Tito`s efforts to re-write a new version of history that resulted in mayhem and catastrophe in Balkans. It proves that it does not matter much what version of history you teach in schools. One must keep in mind that there is always a parallel history that is engraved in the psyche of a nation. It is conveyed from one generation to other regardless of what is taught in schools. Anybody who thinks that he can resolve historic issues by re-writing history lives in a fool`s paradise.

Consider for example the contemporary history of Kashmir that is being written everyday. A future historian, who will try to write a history of Kashmir will find two conflicting versions. The Kashmiri version will tell him a story of murder, rape, oppression, genocide, and denial of basic human rights on part of India; whereas there will be an Indian version too that will tell him the intrigue, terrorism, and intrusion from other side of the border. What would you do if you were that future historian? Wouldn`t you rather present both versions of this history to your audience or would you make a decision for them and spoon-feed them with your one sided theories.

This argument then rightly brings up a counter-argument that then why shouldn’t Pakistani schools teach their students both versions of the history? Here lies the fundamental concept that makes the idea of re-writing history flawed. The reason is that that we the Pakistanis are NOT that future historian. We ARE a party in this double version of the history. Now doesn’t it seem logical that we should support our version?

There is another version of history that is called the Apologists Version. Now apologist versions of history are always there but they stay on the fringe. Whenever someone tried to bring that into mainstream it brings chaos, discontent, and ultimately destruction. That has happened in Balkans and that is what caused the WWII when Allies tried to re-write German history.

If one accepts your argument that the TNT is hollow then by the same logic one should accept that the off-shoot of this theory that`s Pujabism, or Sindhism, or Bengali Nationalism are hollow as well. But you and me both know it that they are not. Especially the creation of Bangladesh should be an eye opener. There is again a fundamental flaw in this argument. Usually TNT is interpreted as a theory that differentiates between the religions and thus teaches us hate. It elaborates on the (petty) differences like the different calendars, different marriage and burial rituals and an invisible God versus a god with nine hands. That is what our friends from across the border, powers-that-be in Pakistan, Globalizers, and apologists like yourself would like us to believe. But this is absurd. The TNT was not a tool to create a rift between two parallel and coexisting civilizations; it was a PROMISE of Social Justice. The kind of Social Justice that Muslim leadership and people believed at that time was not possible with Hindu majority. Especially, the behavior of elected governments of Congress prior to partition strengthened their belief. So the TNT is not hollow. It was as real as the Sindi, Bengali, and Punjabi nationalisms are today.

These nationalisms couldn’t become so strong if Pakistani leadership had delivered the promise of Social Justice right after the Partition. Today, the same people who denied us the Social Justice play games with us sometimes in the name of National security and sometimes in the name of religion. Pakistan would have very well been a Secular state if that promise was delivered to the people right after partition. Now, Pakistani people equate an Islamic state with a state that would deliver them the Social Justice; and they do it rightly so. They believe that Islam has once delivered them an Egalitarian society so it can do so again. That is where the Invaders come in as Heroes.

Although I disagree with yours or Dr. Dani`s version of Ghaznavid invasions but for arguments sake let us suppose that your version is ``true``. I don’t understand why we should judge Ghaznavi`s actions according to today`s standards? It is grossly unfair. According to your post he was following the standard procedures that were a norm in those times. So what, if Hindus suffered more in the ``collateral damage``; so what if he destroyed Somnath if Hindu`s power base was established there. Muslims of subcontinent, however, think more in the terms of the ``fringe`` benefits that his invasions brought in. Whether he converted indigenous people by force or it was voluntary, does it matter now? But at that time it sure did. The new converts were looking at a strange system that they had never imagined in their wildest dreams. That they could actually have a social status that was literally equal to their conquerors. They were experiencing an unprecedented egalitarian society that their mind couldn`t possibly conceive. A society that was free of castes and tyranny of Brahmin. The invasions came as a blessing and that was engraved in their minds permanently. Now it is a part of our national psyche.

About 60 years ago, if someone in Europe had said something about an entity like EU he would have been put in a strait jacket right away. But someone did conceive the idea and it did turn into reality. The pre-WWII history of Europe is full of murder, mayhem, war, and human suffering. Did someone re-write the history to resolve those differences? I don’t think so. Their own versions of history are still alive and well, however, they worked on their prejudices instead. If you are familiar with contemporary Irish history then you might know that it is not the Catholic`s or Protestant`s heroes that start a riot (war) it is the insistence of one group to slap their past victories in others` face. So again what needs to be done here is to work on the prejudices, instead of re-writing Irish history.

I rest my case with the statement that ``PEACE IS NOT ABSENCE OF CONFLICT, PEACE IS THE PRESENCE OF JUSTICE.

EST Reply #: 39

Urstruly

``

I don’t understand the dichotomy in your argument. At one place you said that Muslims were killing Hindus mercilessly and now you say they were living peacefully. I suggest you make up your mind before presenting any of your arguments.``

-- Hindus, were killed and their temples were desecrated by various Mughal rulers, amongst whom, Aurangzeb stands out. Inspite of that, regular Hindus and muslims got along just fine.

The things that happened were more political than personal.

A hindu would not eat at a muslims house, even though they might be good friends. And that was just fine. The muslim did not get offended becuase he knew that his Hindu friend had his own beliefs. They both had mutual respect for each other.

This apparent contradiction, is a fact of life in the sub continet. Hindus and muslims have on the whole had a peaceful existence based upon mutual respect. Hindu-muslim riots were unheard of before, or at least were never to the same scale as they happened today. Before when Hindus were slaughtered, it was mainly because of some ``Hukum`` by the king etc. Regular muslims did not ``hate`` Hindus, just because they were Kafirs.

In recent times, the divisions between Hindus and muslims happened more becuase of political patronage than anything else (at least in india).

And it has become a personal thing. Which is why, small incidents provoke massive responses from muslims. The Shah Bano case is a prime example, where the muslims acted the way they did, simply becuase that would not be appreciated by the Hindus.(And don`t even tell me that muslim law dictates otherwise.... cause muslims do not have any problems accepting those ``non-muslim`` laws in the US and UK).

``

Your paragraph about ``absolute truth`` is a ``Chicken or Egg`` argument. This argument is based on your implication that your books are more accurate and more truthful than ours.

``

-- Could you elaborate ? All I said was the Islam itself preaches respect for people, even if they are non-muslims, right ? And did Ghaznavi do so ?

By killing Hindus mercilessley did he not disobey the Koran ? Please answer my qs ..... I want to understand why Ghaznavi is considered a hero... I want to know the underlying morals/values, which make him a hero to you.

AD

You are welcome Jay.

urstruly#31 (also ad)

Its true that history is a subjective thing and people tend to view it according to their prejudices and biases. But with the passage of time as more and more new evidences and sources come to the surface it becomes increasingly difficult to cheat in history. As far as debate about US textbooks is concerned, an American scholar last year was doing research in Pakistan and India on our social sciences textbooks and she told in a seminar that some time back American textbooks didn`t even mention the name of Hellen Keller (becuse of her leftist views, she even said that she wont like to be born in an unjust and capitalist country like USA) and feminism, but now due to pressure from different sectors, they are forced to include their references. Although there are conservative/ obscurantist forces trying to meddle not even in subjects like history but also sciense (and you thought it was free from human biases; in US biology textbooks conservative Christians are trying their best to include Biblical account of genesis along with theory of evolution), but it doesn`t mean we should be complacent about the situation, we should try to counter any such attempt and try to give as unbiased knowledge to children as possible.

Coming to British source of idea of two nation theory (TNT), well this is not surprising. You can see increasing number of historians on both sides of the border exposing the role of British in distorting the history and causing animosity between Hindus and Muslims - divide and rule was after all secret dehind their success.

An Indian historian Dr. Om Parkash Parshad of Partna University has done research on Mughal emperor Aurengzeb. Muslims and esp Pakistanis revere Aurengzeb as a great Mughal emperor, while Indians do the same to Akbar and Hindu Rajas Ashok and Shiva Jee. Dr. Om has found that although Aurangzeb was more religiously orthodox than Akbar but relgious persecution happened in almost both Hindu and Muslim reins. Akbar demolished as many or even more temples than Aurangzeb, Aurangzeb even demolished a mosque, these all acts were not religious but were to counter rebellion and insurgency. You will be surprised to hear that Hindu Rajas routinely looted and desecrated the temples, there was even a govt institution to account all the lootings from temples during the rein of some Hindu Rajas. Aurangzeb on the contrary banned this practice and used force only to quell rebellion. In Aurangzeb`s army many Hindu Rajputs served as commanders (in Akbar`s rein there were 46 Hindus on higher posts and in Aurengzeb`s 104!). When Marhattas rebelled against Aurangzeb they were joined by certain Muslim rajas and nawabs too. All this shows that much of previous events were driven by political or economic expediency rather than religious idealogy.

If thats so then how come so much biased and parochial history we are studying in schools. Actully it was in the interest of English rulers to divide the two communities and prevent chances of united coalition against the British Raj.( And now it is in the interest of our rulers to continuously alarm against Hindu threat to legitimize their exploitation). Two English historians, Eliot and Dawson ( History of India as told by its historians, published 1887) wrote the history of India according to the accounts of Mislim historians. They made it certain to include only those accounts which would increase religious, political, social differences between Hindus and Muslims.( The above information and Dr, Om`s observation are quoted from Dr. Mubarik Ali`s recent issue of quarterly ``Tareekh`` published by Fiction House).

Just today Dr. A H Dani read an article in conference on Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi conducted by Society of Asian Civilization in Islamabad. Contrary to stereotypic ``Hindu Kush`` image of Sultan Ghaznvi protrayed by British writers, Dr. Dani told that rise and development of the Ghaznavid State is more political and military than religious. (Of course there was barbarity, looting and slave traficking in his expeditions, Aitzaz Ahsan in his book ``The Indus Saga`` says that Ghaznavi`s yearly invasions were so fearsome that Hindu people in upper Punjab region of present Pakistan started naming their children in Muslim names because Ghaznavi alongwith looting and plundering took chilren with him as slaves, Muslims of course had an amnesty). On his part Ghaznavi was not concerned with the spread of Islam, and Muslim rulers in his route to Somnat also became his victims, e.g. in Multan the ruler Abul Fateh Daud coalitioned with Hindu rajas to counter Ghaznavi (but they in the end were defeated). Its about time we see history in its right perspective and it is possible only by looking at other side of the picture too. Dr. Mabarik Ali, K K Aziz, Irfan Habib, A H Dani are doing a commendable job in doing just that.

In my opinion TNT is a half baked theory. Just because Hindus have different life style, leaders, calendars, it doesn`ty mean we can`t live together. At the creation of Pakistan Maulana Abul Kalam Azad told an Indian Muslim procession about to migrate to Pakistan that although Pakistan had been created on the basis of TNT but a time would come when there will be a Punjabi nation, Sindhi nation, Balochi nation and Pathan nation. How true an observation. It seems we have been trapped into the same politics of hatred used against Hindus. The real issue is of economy, we should find economic factors in the making of Pakistan if there were any. After all it was economic injustice that separated East Pakistan from us, recall they belonged to Muslim nation too.

About culture of conformation and disparity in education system I agree with you, will surely write about it next time.

RE: Various

FAIRDINKUM:

Polarity is a blessing as long as there is a common goal. It keeps a check on each other. A wise man thus said, ``Difference of opinion is a blessing for this nation``. Regarding your comment on the phasing out of the O-level system- one of the rules of Machivilian bureaucracy is ``when heat is on, delay the decision``. It is their modus operandi to delay the decisions until they come up with a solution that favors them. So I still suggest that the pressure on them should be relentless.

AD:

Sir your comments on:
- `` A-bomb`` still supports the point that we as human beings try to conform our actions according to our moral values and vice versa-there is no exception to this rule be it Hindus, Americans, Pakistanis or Muslims (or Ghaznavis or Ghauris or Indira Gandhi in Golden Temple, or Indian Army in Kashmir).
- ``Occupation of Iraq`` supports my assertion that everybody has a different perception based on their prejudices.
- `` The fact is that before the Bristish came about, hindus and muslims used to coexist peacefully for centuries, under the Mughals``. I don’t understand the dichotomy in your argument. At one place you said that Muslims were killing Hindus mercilessly and now you say they were living peacefully. I suggest you make up your mind before presenting any of your arguments.
- Your paragraph about ``absolute truth`` is a ``Chicken or Egg`` argument. This argument is based on your implication that your books are more accurate and more truthful than ours. Circular reasoning. If everyone else`s book is correct so is ours then.

VICKY:
I have no intention of opening an Anaath Aashram yet. If I ever do I assure you that you will be the first to be admitted.

KRASHID and FAIRDINKUM: Throughout the discussion we have been forgetting about another ``aadha titter aadha batair``. I am referring to the English medium version of Matric. Man! we are chin deep in this s—t.

Urstruly # 36
“The O-level must be abandoned at once and not phased out slowly. Each and everyday of the presence of this system will cost this nation dearly.”
Well, you know as well as I do that it would neither be practical nor wise to do that. There would be 1000s of students currently enrolled and studying under this system… A gradual phase out would ensure a smooth change over. What you are suggesting would lead to chaos and uncertainty, which is not warranted.
Mayana rawi, my friend, is the best policy!

If I can put another twist by a news story which reads like this.

A girl getting very good marks in her education in school, when appeared for board exam, got very little marks. I don`t know she pursued a proper channel and was rejected or not.

But she wrote a letter to a judge. Who opened up the enquiry herself and it was found that she was given 200+ marks less in board exam after tabulation.

If this a practice to give less marks to a few hundreds poor, to get some IMPORTANT People in the upper merit in highly competitive enviornment, this is highly deplorable and gives an insight into the mind of our corrupt society. Where money is CHANNELED to poor as a bribe to pave the path of rich and their cronies.

So why abandon O-level and not Matric? There are a number of reasons that favor Matric system over O-level but first we should establish that superiority of O-level is a myth. Is it superior because the course outline is suggested by our former colonial masters who still have vested interests in this region? Does it give more objective education? If it does why it contradicts most of our cultural norms? Does the value system imparted by this system of education match our society’s cultural norms? Does it reflect the will of the majority? If not, then how is it democratic? Unfortunately the answer to all these questions is negative. So this narrows down the question of superiority or inferiority to right or wrong. This system of education is not fit for the MAJORITY of Pakistan because:

1. It has divided our nation into classes.

2. It has produced a corrupt ruling class that lacks in all moral values (by any standard).

3. This corrupt class has brought our nation close to bankruptcy (moral and financial both).

4. The cost of keeping this system is immense-and I am not talking just in terms of finances. It is breaking the nation apart. It is responsible for not delivering even the basic human rights to the people of Pakistan. This ruling class is responsible for causing frustration in smaller provinces by not giving them their basic rights.

5. The system is undemocratic because it does not reflect the will of the majority.

6. It is next to impossible to develop an infrastructure that will support the change of curriculum to O-level uniformly. Only the training of instructors is a task that is not justified by any cost-benefit analysis.

7. We can direct all our efforts to develop a uniform system that is a combination of both O-level and Matric curriculum. The task is viable, economical, and possible. There is absolutely no reason that the contents of both curriculum should be mutually exclusive.

The O-level must be abandoned at once and not phased out slowly. Each and everyday of the presence of this system will cost this nation dearly.

Urstruly #27:

Anybody who has been on Chowk and wants to be YLH`s elder brother needs to have his head examined.



But if you are looking for relatives to adopt?, get someone from India. Here is an offer - if you take Laloo, you can have Jaya for free!

We might soon consider a package deal on Azhar & Jadeja too...

Vicky

Reply #: 26

Urstruly

``

You wouldn’t be surprised to find out that American curriculum still justifies the dropping of Nuclear bomb over Japan.

``

--OK, there are many things that USA does that are wrong. So does that mean Pakistan should also do the same thing. Why base your morals on a country which changes morals, whenver it is important for ``US interests`` ?

``

What about Western version of occupation of Iraq?

``

-- Well, it seems that you disagree with the action that the West took against Iraq (granted that it had its own interests in mind). Iraq invaded a soverign kingdom of KUwait and the Emir himself asked the US and UK to help. I do not think that there was anything wrong with that.

``

They may be said, indeed, two distinct and separate civilizations”. (The India I Knew by Sir Stanley Reed p. 176)

``

-- The fact is that before the Bristish came about, hindus and muslims used to coexist peacefully for centuries, under the Mughals. Granted that there were leaders like Aurangzeb, who stood for all that was wrong in the Mughal rule, there were also kings like Akbar. In fact that latter Mughals, the last of them being Bahadur Shah Zaffar, were respected by both Hindus and muslims.

Hindu-Muslim riots were unheard of. I can say so, since my family lived in Old dehli, with both Hindu and muslims neighbours. These riots first started with the TNT theory, which basically says that Hindus and mulims cannot stay together.

In fact, during the freedom struggle, the mullahs themselves were against Pakistan, cause they knew that the TNT was hollow.

``

So it shouldn’t come as a surprise when a hero of one nation is considered an antihero of the other. The Hindus’ frustration with Muslim invaders is thus justified according to their perception but is it true in absolute sense too?

``

-- There are some things, that should be ``true in the absolute sense``. Because granted that there is little common between us, we are still humans, and still bound by the basics of humanity. Hindus were mercilessly slaughtered by the likes of Aurangzeb and Ghaznavi. ALL was done in the name of Islam. Are you telling me that you are proud of such people ? Does Islam condone their acts ? Does Islam propogate that Kafirs should be killed ? By being proud of people like Ghaznavi, you are actually accepting that their actions were justified.

AD

to the person who said that i have taken offence at being called a plagiarist, i dont think i said any such thing, it was just a respnse to mr temporal who i think sort of implied that this article followed oe by pervez hoodbhoy, my remark was in reference to that, no offence was taken, mr temporal has a right to his opinion and i the right to clarify ,thats all

My dear Cheema,

Never before has chowk given me a chance to feel humbled by a post, by the sheer spirit behind the words. Thank you.

regards,

jay

It is interesting how even everyone admits that O levels have higher standards and that O level gives a better education - even though every one admits that metric education is mostly brainwashing and propaganda (which Ustruly justifies with the `propaganda` of others) despite that everyone wants O levels to be shelved instead of metric. Why not shelve metric system of education ? aha but that would mean admitting that the ``elite`` bearucrats (sp? sorry I am das jamaat paas) made a faulty education system (metric) and admitting that we have been dishonest with our history and past and admitting that we got short changed and we are academically inferior.
Admitting and then confronting your demons is the first step towards progress denial (like ``our ways and our faith and our books are perfect``) is not.

Urstruly #27:

[Disclaimer: I am not a participant in the ongoing discussion here.]

Yaar, it is still too early here but the advice from the elder brother cracked me up:)

rgds,

t

Re: Urstruly # 23

I must say that we are poles apart in our views (vis a vis socio-political and religious matters). However, I have to agree with you that the apartheid system of education in Pakistan has not contributed in the least bit in moving things forward. I agree that O level & A level education, despite being “superior” to Matriculation /Intermediate (year 11 and year 12) system of local education, is irrelevant in Pakistan. And I’d go as far as suggesting that it is actually detrimental - an obstacle in the progress of Pakistan, and a hindrance in building an egalitarian society where social justice (which, as you suggest, is the basis of progress in most developed nations) can become a reality.

My reasons are as follows:

This system churns out privileged individuals who enter the work place and society with an attitude, which is reflected in our bureaucracy and the ruling elite. They regard the rest of the population as “inferior.”

The ruling elites and bureaucracy is scared of these uneducated inferior beings (people of Pakistan). They are perceived as “enemies” of the “state” (establishment). They are thus “controlled” and brought into submission for the greater glory of the “state” (establishment) of Pakistan. Barriers and checkpoints are erected on every path, which leads to a Government career. Just look at Army recruitment application forms…they will find out who you are, and whether you belong in this elite club or not. I know you have a soft spot for Pak Army, but this institution is one the most disgusting example of elitism, cronyism, discrimination, and hypocrisy in Pakistan. They not only want to know your race, cast, colour and creed, they want to know all about your mother, your father, your grand father, your grand mother, and all your uncles…. they even want to know your religious sect if you declare yourself a Muslim.

I do not suggest that this system of education be abolished at once, but it should be gradually phased out.
And I am not saying that I am satisfied with local system of education…I am not. But this is where our energies should be spent – in making efforts to improve it… and if we can learn something from other systems, why not…but this apartheid should go…. it’s time we get rid of it – once and for all.

Hearing some people talk here about jealousy concerning the Os and As reminds me of the siuation that is prevalent in schools where both Matric and O`Level systems are practiced e.g Lahore`s Convent and Aitchison. Students who are doing Matric are looked down upon as if they are low and unworthy whereas students studying for their O`levels are considered to be much better and brighter.

I agree that O`Levels are so much more challenging and definitely better than Matric but the attitude some of the kids studying in `rich` people`s schools develop is deplorable. Having myself studied from LGS, I know that snobbery knows no bounds and anyone who is doing Matric (gasp!) is definitely not even worth looking at! It`s sad, this attitude. I am all for excellent equal education but I know for a fact that it is these very people who do not WANT the poor to have an education that matches up to their own because then they`ll have nothing to be proud and arrogant about.

RE:YLH # 25

Dear Yassir,

Desperate situations need drastic steps to get a resolution. The aparthied system of education is wrong, period. It will take decades to bring the Matric system to the ``level`` of O-level; by then it will be too late. However, a combination of both Matric and O level curriculum would make a more pragmatic course. But we both understand that both type of curriculum are intentionally kept mutually exclusive, and for the obvious reasons.

Regarding your question about jealousy-I just have one thing to tell you that, (which you may take as an advice from an elder brother)i.e. ``The sacred cows make the best burgers``. (and YLH you own a whole dairy farm full of sacred cows- try roasting them one by one.)

RE: CHEEMA # 24

Dear Cheema!

The History magazine recently (current issue) conducted a poll to find out how many people think that history is a science. While 100% people voted the subject of Physics and Mathematics as pure sciences only 5% voted that History is a science; 95% of the voters, however, suggested that history is mostly “individual perception”.

If you look at your post in the light of this information you might be able to interpret your “examples” from history more objectively. I suggest you use your browser to check school curriculum of different education boards in North America. You wouldn’t be surprised to find out that American curriculum still justifies the dropping of Nuclear bomb over Japan. It still justifies General Custer’s “adventures” against Red Indians and his Circus as European efforts to spread the civilization. The curriculum in North America does mention the spread of diseases of Old World to indigenous people but does it mention anywhere the leper colonies called “Reservations” where the indigenous population is “confined” even today. What about Western version of occupation of Iraq? Whereas Catholic church has apologized to Jews for their behavior during WWII it still justifies Crusades and European invasions on Islamic World.

In the context of subcontinent there is nothing different. Everything will make sense to you when you understand the Two Nations Theory. The facts on which the Two-Nations Theory was based were well known to everyone including the British. The joint committee of parliament on Indian constitutional reforms had stated in 1934: “ India is inhabited by many races… often as distinct from one another in origin, tradition and manner of life as are the nations of Europe. Two-Thirds of its inhabitants profess Hinduism….over 77 millions are followers of Islam, and the difference between the two is not only of religion in stricter sense but also of law and culture. They may be said, indeed, two distinct and separate civilizations”. (The India I Knew by Sir Stanley Reed p. 176)

So it shouldn’t come as a surprise when a hero of one nation is considered an antihero of the other. The Hindus’ frustration with Muslim invaders is thus justified according to their perception but is it true in absolute sense too? I can bet that even if are able to invent a time machine and go back in time our perception will not be any different. So the present depiction of Muslim heroes in the curriculum is justified as well.

P.S. Other than the fact that Matric course does give an idea and purpose of an ideology, national goal, and a sense of direction, in my opinion, it is worthless too. As Omar puts it in his article that it produces a conformist behavior. So the net result of this system of education is an oppressed class with no entrepreneurial spirit-just the slaves of status quo.

Best regards,

PS. I will write a post discussing Matric system of education next. I hope this article does not slide into “previous 10” by then

Whereas I can see the point about apartheid education but we do not need to destroy anything. What we need to do is to bring the local education system upto par with O levels and A levels and it can be done ...

Please spare us your appeals to destroy the last piece of sanity in our education system. Atleast O levels and Alevels will produce people with a vision ...

Do I suspect a note of jealousy ?

Thanks for this nice piece of work. Education is a very sensitive business and if you cheat with the children in their textbooks, their foundation will be laid on ignorance and hypocricy.

Allow me to add some of the distortions and fallacies we read in our matric/ FSc textbooks:

- In Islamic Studies there is too much generalization and exagerration. We are asked in the exams to highlight the evil and wicked behaviour of pre Islamic Arabs and elaborate how Islam completely changed that. Islam certainly dispelled many evils from the Arab society, but the fact is that you can find good and evil people in both pre and post Islamic era. The real injustice with the subject is the way it mocks with logic and reasoning, questions like ``Holy Prophet (PBUH) was the best person that ever existed, discuss`` ask for discussion while every one knows this question is not meant for discussion, one would do so only with the risk of blasphemy suit.

- Same is the case with Pakistan Hstory which starts the day Mohammad Bin Qassim laid his foot in Sindh. The previous thousands years old history of ``heathen`` Indians is considered unworthy of mention. Sultan Ghaznavi was a great hero of Islam and was driven with the spirit to spread message of Islam, what about his looting and plundering. Mughal emperors are golrified for their beautiful constructions and good taste in arts and poetry, what about their utter disregard for human welfare.

- Indians are depicted as wicked and conspiring lot, who true to their evil nature attacked Lahore out of blue in Sept 1965. What about the Operation Gibraltor. You will find no mention about that in our text books.

- As far as history of pre partition India is concerned, there is no mention of such events as JallianWalla Bagh massacre, Subhash Chandra Bose and Indian National Army, Khudai khidmat Gaar Tehrik, Tehrik e Khaksar, etc. Nehru and Gandhi are depicted only as despicable characters.

The list is very long. I know I will be subject to scathing criticism on chowk, but my plea is that truth never hurts in the long run. Lets breed a culture of reasoning and rationalism in Pakistan. Difference of opinion and criticism should be our real strength and not religious fanaticism and jingoism.

Cheema.

Dear Omar,

I don’t know whether I should thank you for bringing this ugly reality in light so objectively or share my condolences with you. It is a shame that a country that was established on the promise of social justice has adopted an apartheid system of education. In 50 years we have effectively reduced this nation into a ruling class and a class of commons. Throughout the history of Pakistan people of this country have been denied the right of education. If privileged ones get a chance they face a segregated system of education.

The O and A level system of education is an abomination and a crime against Pakistan. This system of education is meaningless and without a direction. It shouldn’t come as a surprise when you see the product of this education system meaningless and without direction as well. The proof of its failure is the prevalent corruption and cowardice of the present ruling class. It produces bureaucrats that prey on their fellow human beings. The engineers, scientists, and doctors that are a product of this system prove to be nothing more than snotty bureaucrats, or just a bunch of heartless Head Clerks.

This system of apartheid is so deeply rooted that the ruling class has also managed to install two parallel judicial systems. Even law is different for poor and the oppressed class. The following quote might sound familiar to some of us, “The nations before you were destroyed because when the member of elite class used to commit a crime they looked the other way and when a down trodden committed the same crime they used to punish him most severely”. Isn’t it plain common sense?

Omar, most of your audience at Chowk are Pakistanis who are presently residing in one of some “successful” nations on this globe; every one of them will testify that the success of these nations is a result of just one thing, that is, social justice. Whereas our education system differentiate between Mahmood and Ayaz.

We spare no effort to condemn Mullah and his Madrassa. I don’t blame Mullah or common people; it was bound to happen. What do you expect when a common man is condemned to stay poor and down trodden just because the Brahmins and Prouhits of our society deny them their basic right of education-deny them their right to grow- deny them their right to elevate their social status. This is a crime against humanity.

The degree of corruption in our ruling class makes sense when you look at their curriculum. Do you expect they will have any sense of respect for the country, when the country is represented as a an example of “disarticulated capitalism”. When there is no ideology, no sense of direction, no national common goal I wouldn’t blame the ruling class if they further disarticulate capitalism to their personal gains. No wonder they take their national pride in the work of dancers and they have men who present their wives to dance in front of other men, as their role models. (Just see another article on this forum). Inna lilla-he wa inna elaihey raja-oon.

In the end, I beg all fellow Pakistanis, whether they are secular, leftist, rightist, fundamentalist, Kemalist, or Nationalist to join hands to condemn this system of apartheid education. This dichotomy in the system of education is a HUMAN Issue.

Jagdeep #5

I totally agree with you.

But on the flip side, who are the rulers of Pakistan. The fathers of ``O`` and ``A`` level, who make our education policies.

It is crocodile tears by all ``O`` and ``A`` levels regarding our education standard.

I did my matriculation in mid seventies and our syllabus was different than this. And although our aim was to get good marks to enter professional college, but its aim was to keep a Pakistani and Muslim identity.

In 1977, our ruling class decided that poor have been given enough voice and let`s tighten the noose. And in Zia`s era Islam served the same purpose what it had been serving all along the history of Islamic Empire. To keep the poor in check through Islam, with Fatwas and Police. And let the field open for elite.

So why this crocodile tears by all ``O`` and ``A`` level, by elitist. And downlooking upon people from Madressah and Pakistani schools.

We will die without your help, but when we die we will make sure, you drown also.

As some one said:

Eik Mein Mar Kay Hazaroon Ko Janam Deta Hun.

Aur Jallad Mujhay Maar Kay Pachtatay Hain.

Re : Omarq

Omar Sahib,

You have written an eye-opening article. No doubt about that;with a detailed examination of the two syllabi, and relegating the conclusions to the reader. It is most commendable indeed. Your last interaction, however, borders on anything but.

As far as i could read, nobody has accused you of being a plagiarist;at which you have supposedly taken visible offence, to the extent of your unmerited explanations. Having been educated in the so called ``west``, i would have expected you to be well versed in the raison d etre of critique, and to be above ``simple`` pride issues.

Sir, Once again, you have done your job well. Let us see, if it opens the eyes of those relevant ``few``, who can make a noticeable difference to bridging the immense gap between the two conceptually opposed educational systems.

I am not holding my breath, however...

Asim

er..and why is that fairdinkum sahib/a ?

Omar sahib,
I wish you hadn`t spoken at all...

this is for mr temporal, while i do appreciate his comments on my o level article he has to realize that the piece wasnt written for a website but for a newspaper, its for the layreader and not, say, a research paper i wuold have to do for one of my college courses, the funny thing is that i have read his comments and those of others after him and i still dont know what he`s talking abaout, as in , the formatting bit is sort of beyond me, as for his comment on the ``aesthetics`` bit and mr pervez hoodbhoy`s article, yes he did write something on thsi too but pakistan has a 140 million people, not all of whom who write in the papers tho, but more than 1 person can write on the same issue and not be (indirectly) accused of plagiarism, what about college when the prof tells all his studenst to do a paper on the same book or whatever, and i also read that chowk is good compared to say a newspaper, well for someone whos worked a bit in the newspaper world, you dont have to forced to read whaat you dont want to read, if you dont like what you read turn the page, or dont buy the paper, or better still write a letter to the editor or your own article if you wish and generally editors try to give both sides of the story, altho websites like chowk do have an advanatge because your response can be submitted immediately and goes through very few layers of editorial screening, surely you cant compare the workng of dawn or the news to how things work at chowk,im sure if thousands of people used this site, the delays would be quite long, and this is for sobia, hello, yes i remember you, you seem to be writing a lot in the papers these days which is eggcelent !

omar quraishi

Re : Difference between O level and Matric(or is that Metric)

I think the difference between the O levels and Matric is rather unambiguous; somewhat akin to the couple of posters, both expressing their discontent with temporal`s excellent critique, in their own inimitable styles; One had more vocal appeal, and was aptly better phrased and the other was merely an exercise in bigotry.

Regards

Asim

Re: temporal

Urstruly, thanks for your response....well, I have said something in the past about temporal`s English grammer and formatting thingy, but you know, I really do admire him for keeping an eye on minute detalis....only shows how keen and sharp an observer he is...and I find his criticism to be eloquent, well intended, and of the highest standard...(don`t necessarily agree with everything he says though :)

Temporal`s contributions on this site are enormous. Know him well before you dish out your crap about this man.

Temporal, please continue to point out any grammer or formatting errors...I (being a peela school boy) learn a lot from your comments...

Re: temporal

``I apologise to you and others whom I may have irked inadvertently by my seemingly undue empahsis on word usage, presentation (formatting), marshaling of arguments.``

No apologies needed here. I`m glad someone does it. It irks and annoys me to read articles some people post without paying attention to something as simple as grammar. Makes them seem uneducated when in reality they are not.

Thanks.

I had read Pakistan: A political Economy by Nadeem Qaiser for my O Level Exams and I was quite impressed by his depth of vision into Pakistani Politics. I ended up getting a B in the Pakistan Studies O Levels. Where as the Book is very informative I sometimes think it is perhaps too much for just O Levels.......

Nadeem Qaiser by the way is/was also the director of Bloomfield Hall schools in Pakistan ... where I studied from Kindergarten to 8th grade.....

Now coming to O Levels vs Matric. There is no question of the superiority of the GCE O level curriculum over Matric... I cant say because I really have had no real experience in the Matric System ... . We need to however establish a system

which is based more on GCSE/IGCSE O LEVEL system instead of GCE O level ... I cannot describe the precise differences that exist between an GCSE/IGCSE O level curriculum and GCE O level ....

When I took my O level exams back in 1997 .... I took 7 GCE O level exams from ULEAC... and one IGCSE O level from Cambridge.... I found the one IGCSE O level (in Business Studies) to be more practical in its questioning .... and more thorough ... instead of taking just one 3 hour exam we took 3 different exams ... which dealt with different areas ...

Some 8 years ago GCE O level was abolished in the UK (GCE A Level remains) and was substituted by

GCSE .... GCSE is more classroom oriented. I see a definite trend in the British Education towards Americanization ... which can be a double edged sword. However the way GCSE followed GCE A levels is today is perhaps the most perfect Secondary/High School system in the world (in my opinion) and can serve to be a model for our own educational system ... which frankly from what I hear is in the Gutters .....

-Pakistan Zindabad

I had read Pakistan: A political Economy by Nadeem Qaiser for my O Level Exams and I was quite impressed by his depth of vision into Pakistani Politics. I ended up getting a B in the Pakistan Studies O Levels. Where as the Book is very informative I sometimes think it is perhaps too much for just O Levels.......

Nadeem Qaiser by the way is/was also the director of Bloomfield Hall schools in Pakistan ... where I studied from Kindergarten to 8th grade.....

Now coming to O Levels vs Matric. There is no question of the superiority of the GCE O level curriculum over Matric... I cant say because I really have had no real experience in the Matric System ... . We need to however establish a system

which is based more on GCSE/IGCSE O LEVEL system instead of GCE O level ... I cannot describe the precise differences that exist between an GCSE/IGCSE O level curriculum and GCE O level ....

When I took my O level exams back in 1997 .... I took 7 GCE O level exams from ULEAC... and one IGCSE O level from Cambridge.... I found the one IGCSE O level (in Business Studies) to be more practical in its questioning .... and more thorough ... instead of taking just one 3 hour exam we took 3 different exams ... which dealt with different areas ...

Some 8 years ago GCE O level was abolished in the UK (GCE A Level remains) and was substituted by

GCSE .... GCSE is more classroom oriented. I see a definite trend in the British Education towards Americanization ... which can be a double edged sword. However the way GCSE followed GCE A levels is today is perhaps the most perfect Secondary/High School system in the world (in my opinion) and can serve to be a model for our own educational system ... which frankly from what I hear is in the Gutters .....

-Pakistan Zindabad

Brat and Uqab:

I, for one, really appreciate temporal`s analysis and his criticism because it is healthy criticism. He actually bothers to read every thing and then, very politely, points out mistakes. Nothing wrong with that, in fact I personally feel good that someone has gone to so much trouble to read and analyse my piece. And besides, he`s good at it so why not admire him for it? He`s certainly better than any grade 8 teacher I`ve ever had!!!!!!

Hi Sir! I was your student about a year back in Kinnaird. Nice to see your work on Chowk and though I`m no oldie here myself, I will say welcome to Chowk: once you start coming here, you wouldn`t want to leave! :)

I absolutely agree with you that Matric textbooks need to be revised..in fact, Pakistan`s entire education system should be revised. I will however add one thing: I did my O`Levels from LGS (Defence) in 1995 and I studied from the Pakistan Studies textbook that did not leave my side till I gave my Bachelors last year. It was a book by M.Ikram Rabbani and EVERYONE used to study from it. It was a horrible horrible book and it was a part of the O`Level course. I don`t know how much the system has changed since I graduated (I like to think I`m not that ancient so the system has probably changed little) but there was this anomaly in O`Levels then.

Matriculation exams, F.A, B.A, all need to be revised but I will also add here, if I may, that there is so much cheating nowadays in O and A Level exams in every city of Pakistan that it is shameful. Perhaps something should be done about this before we are banned from the London and Cambridge boards!

re: Omar Quraishi

A nice comparison of the two systems. The matric system does need improvement. The writers of the text books will definitely need to be more objective. I am sure there is a general realization of this in society and a healthy disregard for the matric curriculum (except the fringe). I am more concerned with the attitude of the O-level textbook writer who tries to make sweeping generalizations like the ``culture of underdevelopment``.

``whether the `disarticulated capitalism` of the Third World will be able to provide some sort of cementing bond to remove the political and economic dichoto