Textbook Questions

The News, Karachi, Pakistan
Saturday February 01, 2003-- Ziqa`ad 28 1423 A.H.

Coping with the enemy
by Mir Jamilur Rahman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

..... President Muhammad Khatami of Iran, who has just concluded a state visit to India, told a gathering in New Delhi that Mahmood Ghaznavi was a marauder who plundered and destroyed Somnath. He added that Mahmood Ghaznavi did not represent Islamic values; he was a military invader and his 17 assaults on India have no relation with Islam or Islamic principles. In fact, the President of Iran said, rulers like Mahmood Ghaznavi have brought bad name to Islam.

Could a Pakistani ever consider Mahmood Ghaznavi a marauder? In their eyes he is a ghazi and hero who smashed the idols. In the eyes of Hindus he is a barbarian who destroyed and looted their temples. And President Khatami has agreed with the Hindus. Does it make him our enemy?

---

http://www.dawn.com/2003/09/12/letted.htm#5

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
12 September 2003 Friday 14 Rajab 1424

Who was Abdali?
by GHULAM KIBRIA, Karachi

The ongoing debate on Abdali (Encounter, Aug 30) brought back to my memory an old Punjabi saying, Khada peetalahe dabaqi Ahmad Shahe da. It was heard in my younger days in Lahore. Being curious to know its background and significance I turned to an elderly person. He explained that this saying refers to Ahmad Shah Abdali`s annual looting spree in Lahore when he would take away everything his army - actually was a gang of looters - could lay their hands upon.

This saying emphasizes the need for spending all one earned during the year and the virtue of not saving anything. For whatever saved would be taken away by Ahmad Shah Abdali.

Lahore was an overwhelmingly Muslim city. Whether Abdali was a ghazi and mujahid or a lotaira is for Islam lovers, academicians and historians to debate, this saying only emphasizes the ground reality.

---

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_10-10-2003_pg3_7

Daily Times
Friday, October 10, 2003

Can Musharraf be like Ghaznavi?
By Khaled Ahmed

For us the great Muslim conquerors of history are a constant inspiration. Reverence to them became a part of the process of nation-building in Pakistan after 1947, especially if these conquerors were not favoured by India. If the Indians liked Akbar, we had to condemn him for deviating from true Islam, even though there would be some aspects of his rule worth emulating for us today to nurture a civil society at peace with itself. If the Indians disliked someone, we had to admire him. That`s what happened in the case of Ghaznavi who invaded India a number of times and laid its places of worship waste in the name of Islam. Ironically, the BJP is paying back for what he did. Because the Indians hated Aurangzeb for imposing ``jazia`` on them, we had to admire him although he was cruel to his brothers and persecuted the mystics we otherwise cherish.

Columnist Javed Chaudhry wrote in ``Jang`` (24 September 2003) that when the Afghan king Mahmud Ghaznavi wanted to invade India his commander advised him to first take care of trouble in the north of Afghanistan. Another courtier told him that as a king he was not to ``ask`` a commander whether he should invade India. He should just give an order and leave it to the commander to carry it out. The column said that General Musharraf instead of giving orders to build Kalabagh Dam was waiting for a consensus in the provinces.

While it is true that strategic decisions have to be taken in Pakistan sometimes without popular approval, it would be improper to refer to Mahmud Ghaznavi as an example to induce General Musharraf to take the decision on the Kalabagh Dam in the teeth of the opposition he faces in three provinces. Anything built in the name of Ghaznavi would not be right for Pakistan simply because his medieval rule was completely out of kilter with the requirements of governance today.

We sometimes wrongly refer to the Justice of Emperor Jehangir (Adl-e-Jehangir) as a model for our justice system today, which is most embarrassing. Jehangir had a bell outside his palace where citizens would shout their petitions for him to decide. The one decision he famously made about his own queen was a most shabby miscarriage of justice. It was also a blatant violation of the separation of the judiciary in today`s terms. Ghaznavi as a medieval marauder is not a good reference to present to a ruler of today. It simply shows a kind of residual primitiveness in us. General Musharraf may be a military ruler but we cannot ask him to become savage like Ghaznavi who after all didn`t do the horrible thing to his own people. .....

---

BBC News
Wednesday, 29 May, 2002, 13:43 GMT 14:43 UK

Pakistan`s missile symbolism
By Zaffar Abbas
BBC correspondent in Islamabad

..... Pakistan relates the present conflict in South Asia to the conflicts of the mediaeval period when Muslim warriors from Afghanistan frequently invaded India.

Ghauri, Ghaznavi, Abdali - these are the three ballistic missiles Pakistan test-fired in the last week.

But these are also names of three prominent Muslim warlords, or conquerors, who invaded India from Afghanistan between the 11th and 18th centuries in an attempt to expand their empires. .....

..... Muhammad Ghauri was a powerful Afghan warlord who in the 12th century had two fierce battles with the Hindu ruler of northern India, Prithviraj Chouhan. .....

..... The other two missiles Pakistan tested during the week are also named after 11th and 18th-century Afghan conquerors, Mehmood Ghaznavi and Ahmed Shah Abdali.

Ghaznavi is described in history books as a temple-destroyer who attacked India 17 times.

Pakistan has never given any specific reason for naming these missiles after such historical figures.

But the symbolism is a clear reflection of the official mindset in the country.

It shows that for Islamabad, the present conflict with India is a continuation of the battles of the past between people described in Pakistani history books as just Muslim invaders and several of India`s cruel Hindu emperors.

``oh plz , plz stop assuming things about people u dont know -- that is ``rank`` foolishness -- ``

Omar:

So you are a communist?? Deft way of avoiding the issue.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

omar_r_quraishi #97

``sadna have you seen the sindhis, balochis, pathans, seraikis or other ethnicities celebrate their local customs -- ``

Good for them. But there was a big problem with the legitimacy of the Bengali language of a Bengali province some years ago, and there is still a problem with legitimacy of the Punjabi language now. Apart from which, I personally have read a number of Pakistani writers argue that provincial /indigenous loyalties cut into nationalism and religious loyalties. Then there is the neverending debate on what part of indigenous heritage is adequately pure Muslim heritage and what must be shunned for its Hindu/nonArabic roots. Would you deny an increasing Arabization and Persianization of language and symbolism.

And you forgot to point out one indigenous hero or role model celebrated in Pakistan. We hear of Qasim, Ghouri, Ghazni, Abdali, Nadir Shah being Pakistani heros. They all came from outside and all went back. But these are your role models, and they are celebrated for being as destructive and rapacious as they were. Your choice, but there is no reason why this must be India`s choice.


``:``The specious plea that Muslim sentiments will be hurt if some foreign invaders are shown in their true colours, actually constitutes an insult to our Muslim brothers and sisters. Why should they answer for the crimes of foreign brigands? Did Indian Muslims not suffer as much as Indian Hindus did under their rule?`` -- yes this is not something that everyone in india, esp the muslims, would agree with sadna -- ``

You mean to say Indian Muslims WANT to be held responsible for the past crimes of foreign brigands? First I am hearing of this. Who was that guy who ravaged Delhi and massacred two hundred thousand of its inhabitants in a short time? You want us to celebrate his military prowess, his looting and the destruction he wrought on Hindus and Muslims alike like Pakistanis do? Why? btw, he did not stay, he went back too.

The issue of what Indian Muslims would prefer is debatable, and the wisdom of celebrating medieval marauders for their rampages is also debatable. That is precisely what the author is saying.

You have a problem with that, that the issue is considered debatable. You always have a problem when an issue is considered debatable. As you repeatedly say, you don`t come here to debate, you come here to tell us off. Well, you will henceforth do it on your own time, not mine.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

omar_r_quraishi #97

the article in EPW and what mr murli manohar joshi goes unrebutted then -- how come none of the paki-bashers responded to the fact that when the union minister vows to rewrite history and says so in a public rally that does constitute govt policy ???

I hope you are not just another nick for Romair. Assuming you are not, please do tell us how official Indian history, as taught in India`s government schools, preaches hatred. Others have been asking you for the same information. Just saying that the union minister vows to rewrite history doesn`t cut it.

FYI, India`s textbooks tell the traditional lie about peaceful Islam and good man Mohammad. I will be happy to provide you with evidence after you have shown us the evidence to back up your claim. After all, solid evidence must be the corner-stone of reporting in Dawn?

yes sadna i do read what i post -- from your post :``The specious plea that Muslim sentiments will be hurt if some foreign invaders are shown in their true colours, actually constitutes an insult to our Muslim brothers and sisters. Why should they answer for the crimes of foreign brigands? Did Indian Muslims not suffer as much as Indian Hindus did under their rule?`` -- yes this is not something that everyone in india, esp the muslims, would agree with sadna --

(who is this girl sadna, why does she assume that she can think for everybody else -- jeez)

sadna: ``Obviously for Pakistanis it is a crime not to praise the most destructive and ruthless of conquerors and it is a crime to value ANYTHING indigenous.`` -- didnt take long to bring out the hatred inside you against pakistan, sadna :) -- so much for your pretentious civilty dah ling


sadna you wrote: ``But by what logic do Pakistanis expect Indians to subscribe to such Pakistani values, too?``

-- who in the world is asking u to do that sadna, the article certainly doesnt -- it doesnt say anything about india in any case --

sadna again (more vicious now): ``India is different, we celebrate our indigenous languages, their literature and local arts as part of our nationhood. In Pakistan these are considered a threat to Pakistani nationhood. I still do not understand, why are Indians supposed to adhere to Pakistani worldview and Pakistani values ?`` --
pure unadulterated paki-hating vitriol -- sadna have you seen the sindhis, balochis, pathans, seraikis or other ethnicities celebrate their local customs --

stuka -- spare us the lecture and just tell us that youre no communist/socialist sympathizer and again: ``I would rather have a Urstruly talk to me about the benefits of a truly Islamic country/system then have a non-communist pass on leftist articles for my benefit. The latter is rank hypocricy.`` -- oh plz , plz stop assuming things about people u dont know -- that is ``rank`` foolishness -- and by the way plz get real, do u really think that i come to interact here for your convenience -- maybe ylh does come but not i stuka -- and your statement ``At least Indians preach the examples of secularism and democracy to Pakistan``, given that you say this on Chowk, sounds quite absurd by the way

nb -- i would have thought u would find nothing wrong with that -- look at you trying to explain yourself -- that doesnt suit u nb -- i dont have a problem with u agreeing with what the guy wrote and about romila thapar`s views and your judgment of her -- but i can say, cant i, that u guys are nothing but VHP/BJP/RSS sympathizers -- u certainly arent leftwingers because most of u seem to think that to be a term of abuse -- oh what a pity for chowk


jay -- yes actually we have written several times about the loot of plunder of hindu temples -- also wrote an editorial a couple of months ago about how a sikh temple in peshawar was being threatened by the local land mafia -- other english papers wrote about it and the demolition has been permanently halted -- anything else dear ? terrorist for you jay, freedom fighters for others -- no need to speak to the owner, my paper has a very professional editor -- and by the way we havent started writing on such stuff post 9/11 shri jay jee -- doing it ever since i can remember being at my paper, which is since 1994 -- i think that was before 9/11 --

the article in EPW and what mr murli manohar joshi goes unrebutted then -- how come none of the paki-bashers responded to the fact that when the union minister vows to rewrite history and says so in a public rally that does constitute govt policy ??? come on, where are the rebuttals from you pathological paki-haters --


i used to think that the indian education system is much better than pakistan`s but after seeing the indians on chowk i might have to reconsider that view --

omar Q

Thanks for the long postings. i was hoping for some specific excerpts along with your editorial remarks showing how the books spout hatred. I am still unable to understand how NCERT books (i.e. the govt books) teach any hatred, even after ``saffronization``. In Rajput`s letter (which I am sure you found on the link I provided), all I see is spirit of open discussion. Are you perhaps upset that one of the authors Rajput challenges is a muslim (Habib?). In that case, you are off mark.

Thanks again, but I was hoping for something original, considering you are a journalist, and perhaps have access to some material not accessible or already known to us.

Sangh Parivar gaurav-gatha etc is not a govt book, and any group in India is allowed to glorify anything they wish at their expense (freedom of association). They can glorify greatness of Church of England, the Vatican, Lenin (or Stalin), Michael Jackson, Moses or Imam Ali. In fact, there are some extremely popular comic books called ``Amar Chitra Katha`` (nothing govt), which write obout everythign from battles of Md. Ghauri and P. Chauvan, to exploits of the very-happening Hanuman. Nothing to get all upset about. And I must say, the comic book does not say anything nice about Ghauri.


http://www.indiaplaza.com/catalog/books+software/books_catalog.asp?catid=1539&subcatid=107&majorcat=books&subcat=books&place=US

stuka

espousing that certain cause

Urstruly:

I disagree with you as well but you espouse a certain cause openly. What hypocrisy were you accused off?

stuka

please do not cite my example. Very recently on another board I have been told by a Hindu and a Pakistani at the same time that I am a hypocrite as well. Both of them disagree with my point of view but cannot refute it. So the easy way out is to call me a hypocrite and go about their business.

Mr. Qureshi

Do you actually expect Indians on Chowk or otherwise to pay attention to communist rantings? This person talks about populist radicalism and revolutionary class outlook. Do you subscribe to communists beliefs? Have you worked for the establishment of communism in Pakistan and the banishment of all traces of Islam from public life? Assuming your position in a mainstream Pakistani paper, I would assumer not. Then where do you get off telling us to follow the thoughts of communists. At least Indians preach the examples of secularism and democracy to Pakistan, principles that are at least attempted in our polity and our guiding objectives. I would rather have a Urstruly talk to me about the benefits of a truly Islamic country/system then have a non-communist pass on leftist articles for my benefit. The latter is rank hypocricy.

NHK:

``Wasn`t the geographical name of India , Hindustan - why was it changed to India?``

When India was divided, Jinnah did not want either part to be called India; instead he wanted them to be called Hindustan and Pakistan. The Indian leaders successfully insisted on retaining the name ``India/Bharat`` for their part. I presume that Nehru wanted to avoid the name Hindustan in order to avoid the notion that the new country belonged to the Hindus only.

``And all those who lived in Hindustan were Hindus - Hindu being more of a geograohical identity and not a religious identity.``

This is the position of the BJP/RSS. They would want Muslims to think of themselves as Hindus who believe in Prophet Mohammad, Christians who believe in Jesus as son of God, and so on.

``Similarly, the Mahabharta and Ramayan being a cultural heritage of the region - rather than having any specific religious connotation. And all being a part of Hindu mythology - mythology coming from the word myths. This also being called Dharama or a way of life.``

This is again the BJP/RSS position. I think this is only partly true for two reasons: One, Mahabharta and Ramayana, in addition to being cultural heritage, also are full of religious significance for the Hindus; secondly, one cannot thrust cultural heritage on someone who rejects it, this is the case of the Indian religious minorities in general and Muslims in particular.

``And the only OPERATIVE religious part being Brahminism. And Brahamism being equivalent to other formal religions like Judaism, Christianity or Islam.``

I am not aware of Brahminism as religion, although the term is frequently used by leftists and western scholars to emphasise the position of supremacy accorded to the brahmins in the Hindu caste system. Hindus can be more properly categorised as shaivites, vaishnavites, Kali worshippers, arya samajists, sanatanists, sai followers, etc.

``Meaning that Hindus, following the Dharama of Hinduism, could still have different OPERATIVE FORMAL beliefs like Brahminism, Chritianity, Judaism, Islam etc.``

Once again, a page from the BJP/RSS philosophy!

If you want to open a Pakistani branch of the BJP, contact party chairman Venkiah Naidu at Ashoka Road, New Delhi. :-)

This is the link to a Brookings Institute discussion on the Pakistani (and Afghan) education system. Forget the Afghan part, just read the Pakistan-specific discussion. Shahid Burki has some good things to say along with the others.

A lot of Madrassahs have to be closed down, but it seems that General Musharraf does not have the will to do that. It is also time Pakistanis stop crying about the Ummah and concentrate on themselves.

http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20011217.htm

Sadna,

``When Pakistani children are being taught to count corpses at age 7 and to consider armed aggression as the only way to deal with infidels, India might have to finally adapt its education system to teach its children to fight back too.``

Two wrongs don`t make a right. This will be a huge mistake. Just because the Pakistani education system is messed up doesn`t mean that India takes the plunge too. Do you forget the 130-140 million Indian Muslims? What will be the effect on them if Indian textbooks start counting Muslim corpses?

I haven`t seen any Indian textbooks, but i doubt the Indians would be that stupid. Keeping in mind India`s diversity, this would be an act of lunacy.