If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

Arts & Culture History
21

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

I have always wondered why your invaders are so glorified? The only thing they have in common with you is religion. But then I am not sure how much is true. I knew a pak acquaintance who told me that Sikinder is a common name for muslims and it is a form of Alexander the great. Alexander was no muslim but his name seems to live on in the muslims of the subcontinent while nobody gives a thought to poor Paurava. I mean how many people do you know named Porus/Paurava?

22

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

To be converted you have to destroy your past, destroy your history. You have to stamp on it, you have to say 'my ancestral culture does not exist, it doesn't matter.- VS Naipaul

23

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

The current doctored history has its roots after 79. Before that it was quite diverse, neither did people become non Muslims nor the current one has made is more Islamic.

24

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

**
Here some extracts from study on education policy in Pakistan during Zia regime**

Like Pakistan’s foreign policy, the national curricula, introduced by the Zia regime mainly and perpetuated by the successive regimes, follows certain cardinal principles:

(a) that India is a perennial threat to Pakistan’s existence;

(b) that Islam is the only cementing force that can keep Pakistanis united since their cultural differentiation is too obvious and therefore unpalatable for the ruling elite;

(c) that the military is the second holy power (after Islam) that binds Pakistan together and a guarantor of its existence;

(d) that Pakistan belongs to the Ummah, especially the Middle East, and not to the South Asian cultural history marked by diversity and plurality.

It is neither in the economic interests of the religious establishment who run madrassahs nor does it suit the ruling elite to create an equitable educational system. The prevailing three-tier system has its roots in the colonial times when the British allowed the religious seminaries to thrive since their aim of introducing modern education to only a limited class was to prepare a select number of people who would facilitate them in running the colonial bureaucracy.

Some of those religious schools were run by Christian missionaries and some formal and informal religious education was controlled by the Muslim religious scholars. This discrimination continued, both in India and Pakistan, even after the Independence. In Pakistan, however, this situation created more sinister implications for the society and the state.

The religious establishment was deliberately strengthened by successive governments for political expediencies.
Consequently, since the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, thousands of madrassah students (or Taliban) were employed to fight in the Afghan wars. The story of the rise of Taliban is too well known to be narrated here. The disgruntled and disillusioned jihadists, returning from Afghanistan turned against what they perceived as the enemies of Islam in Pakistan. It explains the large scale sectarian killings that continue even today in almost all parts of Pakistan. What turned them into such fanatics? And why even a good number of college and university students (studying rational sciences) were attracted to extremist thought? Theanswer is simple: The national curricula in Pakistan Studies, Islamic Studies, history, and Urdu have been designed to promote extremist ideology. A significant development of the late 1970s has been the decline of the discipline of History, replaced in turn with Pakistan Studies as a compulsory subject up to the undergraduate level.

25

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

Let me quote you example of this thought, where Moen Jo Daro civilisation was disowned in Sindh.

26

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

:fatee: There is a belief that Alexendar is the same Dhul-Qarnain mentioned in Quran

27

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

Islamic education in the beginning was international even greeks were read, like plato and aristotle, now it has become too much like everything is in religious book and religious discourses.

28

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

**
A break-up of Pakistani syllabus leading to this thought:** Source: Pakistaniaat: A Journal of Pakistan Studies Vol. 4, No. 2 (2012)

The 1992 National Educational Policy was a continuation of Zia-era policies; and the 1998 policy was again a grim reminder that the Zia-era remnants among the policy-makers were still influential to keep Pakistani society on the old track. In 1999, with the return of military rule, Pakistan once again was thrown into the abyss of political instability and ideological chaos. Due to 9/11 attacks, Pakistan became the frontline state in the war on terror. Under American pressure, the military government of General Musharraf tried to change Pakistan’s sociocultural trajectories by bringing about substantial changes to the national curricula
as reflected in the syllabus of various subjects prepared from 2003-08.

These measures, however, proved cosmetic as no serious attempt was made to reform the educational system, particularly of the religious seminaries most of which still function on the same lines set by Zia-era policies, catering to the needs of the Cold War era.

There is no regulatory authority to control the 12599 seminaries where, according to 2008-09 statistics, around 1.65200 million students are enrolled. They are pre-dominantly controlled by the private sector and the state is oblivious to them.

The condition of state-run schools and colleges is no better since the syllabus of various subjects taught there is equally radical.

A survey of text books of Punjab Text Book Board for grade 1 to 10 covering three subjects (Urdu, Pakistan Studies, Islamic Studies) reveals that out of 871lessons, 318 are pertaining to religion, 299 about Islam, and 261 about ethics with Islamic interpretation and characters. In its comparison, only 100 lessons (purely based on Ethics and in
favor of peace and Tolerance) are included in all the text books for the three subjects. As against 29 lessons depicting non-Muslim characters favourably, there are 45 that paint them in negative terms. Alongside 61 lessons that use religion in favour of peace and tolerance, still there are 16 that promote religion not in favour of peace and tolerance. There are 98 lessons that promote nationalism. There is no harm in that if responsible nationalism, and not militant one, is promoted. This thinking is also reflected in the 70 lessons that use religion and nationalism simultaneously. The nine lessons promoting peace and tolerance by using religion and nationalism are effectively neutralized by the 29 which use religion and nationalism not in favour of peace and tolerance. Since waging wars is mostly a male hobby, there are only 08 lessons with female characters as against 210 that have male characters.

Dr Ishrat Hussain in his analysis of the state of social sciences has pointed out the importance of de-radicalization of curricula of certain fundamental subjects:

The constraints imposed on the universities and academia in general to subscribe or follow a particular school of thought about religious thinking, ideology of Pakistan, history of separatism from India etc. should be removed. Competing or alternative ways of thinking provoke debate, discussion, discourse and further inquiry that challenge conventional wisdom and generate new knowledge continuously. Hostility towards other view points or defensiveness are not the right attributes for an academic community. These are the attributes of an intellectual graveyard. Some of the challenges facing Pakistan today would have been resolved if there was freedom to pursue independent thinking on some of these issues (Hussain 2008:14).

Perhaps the most impressionable of all school-going children belong to sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. If text books for these classes for the compulsory subjects of Urdu and Social Science are analyzed, it reveals a disturbing picture. Of 165 lessons, 58 are about religion, of which 57 are about Islam. Of these 58 lessons about religion, only 06 promote peace and tolerance. There is not a single positive reference of any non-Islamic character. Not only this, there are even references against various Islamic sects. There are 42 lessons about religion and nationalism. Only one of them emphasizes the importance of tolerance and religious harmony. According to Amer Riaz, an anylysis of such content reveals certain precepts upon which Pakistan’s national curriculum is prepared:

  1. All positive things are to be found only in Muslim culture.

  2. Some Muslim sects diverge from the path of Islam and are therefore condemnable.

  3. Religion and nationalism are employed in the cause of war against all ‘others’, whether Muslim or non-Muslim others.

  4. Islamic/Muslim history is taught in a way that the easily impressionable minds of children can be molded on extremist lines

  5. The content about science & technology, modernity, peace and tolerance is minimized while war and jihad (only in the limited sense of armed struggle) are glorified

  6. Narrow-mindedness is inculcated by ignoring the good qualities of the rest of the world and thus militant nationalism is ingrained in the minds of the
    young. (Riaz 2010)

**The consequences of such ideology for the national cohesion and social fabric of Pakistan are not hard to imagine. **:wink:

29

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

Yes and thats why Muslims failed to produce scientists like Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Al-Razi, Jabir bin Hayyan, Khwarzmi etc after 14th-15th century

30

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

what kind of lessons this guy is talking of which promotes sectarianism?

31

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

I don't remember examples from syllabus in Sindh, but the first line that comes to my mind while thinking of our History classes at school is : Hindu aur Musalmaan do alag alg qomen hai, unka odhna bichhona, khana peena, rehn sehn sab alag hai. I read this in class 4th History and I had already seen Hindus sharing a common wall with us. Their khana peena was not different. We used to go and buy achaar from Hindu lady when our Phuppo come to visit us and achaar was her favorite. Todate, my ammi get papaRs from Hindu lady, which we share with our friends here in Karachi

32

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

i remember this, but the islamiyat that we used to study was different for shias and sunnis. And the non muslims used to have their own ethics subject. Could be some sectarianism related stuff now a days who knows.

33

Re: If not Ghaznavi and Ghauri, then who?

Zia reminds me of the best teacher under whom I studied history in DU

"Aurangzeb was the best general and very able commander, so the type of rule this type of personality can impose, is despotic, in modern terms it is called Martial law :D", in our neighborhood there was another general of this sort, his name was General Zia ul Haq"