What are they Teaching in Pakistani Schools Today?

To All Islamists:

please always remember that this word has been coined by those with the secularist & liberal mindset.Obviously the antonym for this is the Un-Islamist.I recommend that,henceforth,this term be used for such buffoons.

It is high time that the nefarious designs of such `learned` people be exposed who have been the ``Talibans` of the Harvard,Cambridge,& 0 & A levels system of `education`.It is another matter that despite their best efforts they have always pathetically failed to gain converts.The proof is that more & more fringe-muslims & non-muslims are feeling the pull of Islam in the farangi-lands.

How come that most of the desi schools attendies in Pakistan always get enrolled in 0ne or two higher grade in the public schools in North America & Britain?.When the graduates of same universities apply their standard is reduced to a grade 10 or 11? Equal to those some of who cannot even read the english newspaper?

Next to armaments the greatest business in the farangi lands is that of `education`.How come that Germans & French are able to teach without resorting to the brownie-pilpili-sahib theatrics.

If Hoodbhoy(of Dumbo-fame) is sincere in his `mission` let me suggest to do the following:

1.Change his garb.He should look,walk,& talk like his desi village pupils.(He may suddenly feel his I.Q lowering a few notches,but this will establish his true esteem.

2.Stop quoting `foreign` solution to indigineous situations.Take a course or volunteer with MAULANA(never forget this word MAULANA) Abdul Sattar Eddhi.

3.If he is using any farangi props & is sneeringly peppering them to augment his arguments:Like drinking,cigar or pipe smoking or wearing farangi bill-boards(otherwise known as apparel) the please abandon that.

4.Try to work as a scientist or an educator.Do not mix and match them.It seems your are failing in both.A scientist is as secular as a taxi driver,mistry,carpenter & surgeon.Please do not mix religion with the mundane secular(worldly,materialist,belly filling activities).Leave the affairs to guide the people to those who do it best.Politicians,maulanas,social volunteers & soldiers and poets and charity prone individuals)

5.Are you willing to sacrifice something of value for your cause----no matter how `misguided`---like money,relationship,lifestyle,career etc etc .If not then believe me you are already a big time-consumer.



Pakistan is not the name of the territory between Iran & India.It is a concept & Ideology which needs continous grooming & preening.Is it any wonder that the most active community in matters muslim & Islam is the one from India,Pakistan,South Africa, & East Africa(all fro Indo-Pak origin)? With the resolve & reinforcement of the Afros this is already the most vibrant & dynamic community.Pakistan is the name of the muslim renaissance & we Pakistanis are thankful to have been the fortunate ones to play this role.It is another matter that this fruit is being wasted by the parrots & mynahs of the farangi `school` of thought.

You just cannot shake it off.The CHANGE will come from within the farangi lands.Our youth need the positive leader-ship role scenarios & not the whining & ridiculing disdain for the grand value system we already have.

Look what they are achieving with your `help` & without your help.Just do a quick reality check.The children of Islamists are achievers & those of Un-Islamists are druggies & burger-flippers.What you sow so shall you reap.

To all Islamists:I S L A M P A I N D A B A A D !!

US Report Admonishes Pakistan on Terror

WASHINGTON :A State Department report on terrorist activities worldwide urges Pakistan to curb armed groups fighting India for control of the disputed territory of Kashmir.

The admonition is contained in the department`s annual report on terrorism, due to be released Monday.

While Pakistan is not on the list of countries that sponsor terrorism, a State Department official said the report notes that Pakistan is being watched. ``They need to do better,`` said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Pakistan and Afghanistan are accused of providing safe havens and support to international terrorist groups.

The world faces greater threats from ``loose networks`` of Pakistani and Afghan groups and individuals motivated more by religion and ideology than by politics and financed increasingly by drug trafficking, crime and illegal trade.

The New York Times, saying it had obtained the full 107-page report, reported in Sunday editions that in addition to Pakistan, the latest report is especially critical of Afghanistan for providing safe haven and support to international terrorist groups.

The congressionally mandated report, issued each spring, largely mirrors the comments on Pakistan made by President Clinton when he visited that country on March 25.

Clinton pressed Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani leader, to ease tensions with India and restrain Islamic militants from moving across a cease-fire that divides Kashmir between the two countries.

Clinton said Pakistan must ``create conditions that will allow dialogue to succeed`` in resolving the Kashmir dispute, which nearly sparked a war between the two South Asian rivals last summer.

The Times said the report cites Afghanistan as a ``major terrorist threat`` by, among other things, continuing to shelter the Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, who is wanted in the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.

Overall, it said, the report concludes that the threat of terrorism now comes less from state-sponsored attacks than from ``loose networks`` of groups and individuals motivated more by religion or ideology by politics and financed increasingly by drug trafficking, crime and illegal trade.

The Times said the report also notes that the weapons of choice are moving away from car and truck bombs and other explosives and more toward biological, nuclear, chemical and other ``weapons of mass destruction,`` as well as ``cyber-terrorism.``

Amit #132

I think you are taking a very simplistic approach to casteism. Your arguments based on color are especially superficial. I don`t care about Islam and I don`t want to defend it, but this is the first time I heard that Islam is skin skin-color conscious! WOW!

I know, south & north Indian fair skinned shudras, North and south Indian dark skinned Brahmins, and every color combination for Muslims.

Except for Indian born religions, there is no other religion which gives preferential treatment to caste, color, skin or nationality. Once other religions take you in their fold, you can become a priest, carpenter or a mortician with the same level of access to god.

Incidentally, the non availability of god, and inequality of status for Shudras was/is the main reason for them to convert to Christianity and Islam. And not skin color!

Think about it.

Vicky

Re:temporal#120

The article you posted on the caste system is very interesting. Although I am myself a hindu brahmin, I completely agree that the caste system is responsible for the decay, degeneration and defeat for India in the past. Babar has written in his memoir ``Babarnama`` about an incident when he was fighting with a hindu king. On the eve of the battle, he noticed that there were a lot of fires burning on the hindu army site. When he asked about it, he was told that different subcastes in the hindu army were cooking food separately, hence the fires. Babar immediately replied that he would win the next day, which is exactly what happened. If people cannot eat with each other, how can they fight together ?

The real issue is why did hindus institute such a wretched system for thousands of years ? The answer is obvious - racism. The subcontinent has seen numerous fair skinned invaders in history. Each group of invaders won political power but then they could not figure out what to do with the dark skinned natives. You could not kill so many people. Moreover, it was very tempting to lead a life of luxury on the backs of the subjugated people, exploiting their labor and using their women. Different invaders came up with different strategies. The aryans came up with the caste system.

The idea of the caste system was to blame everything on your past life`s actions. If you did not like your present, it was because you were bad in your previous birth. Keep on doing your best so that the next birth would lead to better results and a better caste. What a perfect system to maintain status quo for domination. It worked a bit too well, because the Aryans became lazy, decadent and degenerate which led to their defeat by muslims.

Muslims and the british faced a similar dilemma when they won political power. When muslims faced the more aryan hindus in Pakistan and Afghanistan, their objective was conversion. Yet when the muslims occupied India and faced the more dark skinned natives, suddenly they lost all interest in conversion. Why was that so ? After all who wanted a whole bunch of dark skinned muslims claiming equality based on Islam ? So they conveniently settled down to maintaining racial/ethnic boundaries and forming alliances with hindus. The british similarly maintained racist boundaries but tried to create an intermediate, educated class that would be a buffer between them and the masses. The overall them is the same - racism.

In response to bilal_naseer (Reply # 129)

Dear Bilal:

Your comment is quite appropriate. However, the power of your comment may not be denied provided an overwhelming majority of Pakistani schools maintain at least a minimum level of academic standard. Do they? Are Pakistani schools a reflection of the troubled state of Pakistani state and civil society? Do you know how many “ghost” schools exist in various parts of Pakistan?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. Bilal, I hope you won`t mind this Bilal to Bilal communication.

For longest now I have wondered what a waste of time chowk can be....

I want to start with Pervez Hoodbhoy. I know a student of yours who is a Fulbright scholar here in the US. He was kind enough to tell me more about you because that Peter Jennings Show ``India Pakistan and the Bomb`` really had me interested.

I understand that you have devoted your life to science and Mathematics and the presently Pakistan seems to lack in the mentioned fields. I am some times baffled by your approach to the issues of Pakistan ..... all of you have done is lament all through .... and pseudo intellectuals of this forum have said yay to everything you have said...

you have time and again used the example of ``Taliban`` and the cursed ``Mullahs`` ...is that all there is to Islam???? .... and you have time and again singled out Islam as the cause of backwardness of Pakistan. In essence you have committed the same fallacy as Attaturk .....

whereas I commend your stance against obscuranitism and fanaticism I must say that to condemn a whole civilization and to take away their right to feel proud of what they have been and of their essence ... is essentially killing them .... this was Attaturk`s folly ... and thank god you are not in power ...

So let us think before we speak .... pragmatic solutions can only be considered if you clear on an ideological plane....

So what do we need to teach our kids in school is big question ? A question which is beyond the capacity of an undergrad in the US who spent his entire life studying in American and British systems ....

but like it or not ....

Ideologies are inculcated through education ....

Whereas a thinking, interpretive mode of acquiring

knowledge should be pursued one cannot abandon the

inculcation of national pride in a child. But I am not here to debate whether this should be done or not done ......

I agree with most of what you have to say but you display such fascination of newly acquired awareness .... you come across as very juvenile!!!

As for the rest of you who have drawn tangents with Mahmud of Ghazni and MB Qasim ......

Mahmud Of Ghazna and Muhammad bin Qasim will remain heroes for Pakistanis as they will remain the worst scourges for Indians !!!!! Thats the way its meant to be ...

One thing we know for sure that Mahmud of Ghazna was never defeated in battle till the time he took up arms against the jats.....

By the way Mcgupta ... I was educated in the British and American systems of Education in Pakistan but

for the drama that your country has put on in Kashmir for the last 53 years has made me feel the same way as that young girl in that remote border village ........

So need I quote my hero Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who said in the UN on the 15th December 1971 on the eve of defeat ...

`` I say what Cato said to the Romans ... Carthage must be destroyed ... and we will tell our children and they will tell their children``

You have forced this mode of thinking .... by doing what you have done in Kashmir, by criticizing the Partition and by threatening us with agression for 53 years! So untill India changes its ways and accepts the fact that Pakistan is here to stay ... and that people have a right to choose .... that self determination supercedes other ideologies and principles ....

``India is our enemy and India must be destroyed and we will tell our children and they will tell their children``

and you can rest assure this is coming from someone who has never been exposed to the Pakistani educational system!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You force insecurities on our people and then you expect us not to defend ourselves ...... this is why people like Najam Sethi are traitors!

There are priorities higher than the priorities set out by the learned Professor from MIT ......

Science and Mathematics count but not at the cost of our annihilation!!!!

I know I am inviting intellectual wannabe ruthless diatribe .... so let the good times roll!

Bilal Nasserr.

I agree with you.

May be in current times, Dr. Hoodbhoy has come up with this.

I think not only Dr. Hood bhoy but most Pakistanis on this board have studied from same schools in Pakistan, which he is mentioning.

Seeing the QUALITY and CONTENT of Indian repliers, I think Dr. Hoodbhoy got hold of Indian Curriculum by mistake and interpreted it according to his way of thinking (which I think reflects an education from the highly secular Indian schools).

Sameer #128:

Yes, history will continue to be re-written by victors.

It is always awkward and unpopular to de-pedestalize leaders, especially after they have been ‘sainted’ and blessed by subsequent leaders.

But not to trivialize the discussion, the points you have raised about these Indians must be put in context. Yes they were a force. But not much of a force because their numbers were small. And their support base was smaller.
Smaller in comparison with the powers that be on the Indian horizon. (Structured and supported by the colonial owers.)

Even Gandhiji would have been marginalised had he not returned to India to fight the battles.

You say, “Most of the people have never heard of names like, Lala Hardayal, Prem Chandra, Lala Lajpat Rai, Barkatullah (Maulawi Barakat Ullah of Tokyo University), Kartar Singh, Jatin Mukherjee, Vishnu Ganesh Pingley and Dasi Chinahiya.” To this I would add Sant Teja Singh of Harvard, Amar Singh and Gopal Singh, and Tarak Nath Das and Ram Nath Puri (they started AZADI KA CIRCULAR in Urdu from California) Bhai Bhag Singh Bhikkivind, Baba Sohna Sing, Bhai Harnam Singh, Dr. Mathura Singh, Hafiz Abdulla to name a few more. And Ismail Shaheed, though his aims were more limited.

With no lines of communication and support, the independence proclamation in Afghanistan was doomed from the start, even though they had the support of the Axis powers in 1915. Though with their defeat that support fizzled.

This left leaning shama-e-azaadi must be still there in early twenties on the west coast. I remember reading about Chaudhry Rehmat Ali ( of the Now or Never pamphlet first coining the name PAKSTAN) visiting California for a couple of years at around that time. A digression: one of the signatories of that pamphlet was the President of Khyber Union then, Aslam Khattak. He is still alive, nearing nineties, an Uncle of “Zeejah”.

Your last paragraph is an apt eye opener for objective study of events at that time.

Pls. send me your email address. My address in on the Chowk dargah.

regards,


t

temporal(#120): Most nations like to teach and indoctrinate their populace to a nation-specific interpretation of history. They intentionally left out certain aspects with are usually contrary to the specific portrayal of historical figures. For instance what is taught and popularly believed about the history of the United States is markedly different than what is portrayed in “A Peoples’ History Of The United States” by Howard Zinn or the several books by Noam Chomsky about the more recent history.

We have seen several exchanges here at Chowk about how different people from India and Pakistan will have different opinions about some of the historical figures of the past, like M. B. Qasim, Mahmud Ghaznavi, Shahab Ghauri, Ahmad Shah Abdali, Nadir Shah, Amir Timur and Aurangzeb. All this area of Islamic Empires of India would be pale compared to the history of freedom movement, only if both India and Pakistan start teaching, in detail, the accounts of freedom struggle outside the bounds of Congress and Muslim League. They will not do it because it might adversely effect the larger-than-life images they have created for Jinnah, Nehru, Gandhi and of Congress and Muslim League.

Most of the people have never heard of names like, Lala Hardayal, Prem Chandra, Lala Lajpat Rai, Barkatullah, Kartar Singh, Jatin Mukherjee, Vishnu Ganesh Pingley and Dasi Chinahiya. These were some of the graet leader who wanted to snatch freedom as opposed to begging for it. Many of them were associated with “Ghadar Party” which was founded actually in San Francisco, USA. They were leftists or left-of-center and quite popular leaders with strong grass-root support among the masses. Their movement for freedom were particularly strong in Bengal and Central Punjab during the time of Ist World War. They were asking for total independence when Gandhi and Nehru were supporting British war efforts, licking Raj’s feet and would be perfectly happy with local-self government or the dominion status and Muslim league was insignificat in the political areana. At least in Punjab during this period, both Congress and ML were absolutely no match with the popularity of Ghadar Party, Lala hardayal and Lala Lajpat Rai. How many of you have ever heard of Raja Mahendra Pratap Singh? He was a Ghadarite who would set up an Indian Government in-exile in Afghanistan in 1915 which was even recognized by Germany, Turkey and Afghanistan--and opposed by Congress and ML. It was only after the death of Lala Lajpat Rai in 1928, that Nehru--seizing the opportunity for support in Punjab-- would come to the banks of river Ravi in 1929 and ask for total independence for India.

British Raj clearly divided the freedom seeking people and parties into anglophiles and anglophobes. They intentionally created an uneven playing field where anglophiles and freedom-begging Congress and ML would enjoy an edge over anglophobes, the freedom-snatching Ghadarites and likes, who have to face much harsher conditions to survive. In time, this strategy worked, with Congress gaining support in UP, Bihar, Gujrat, Maharashtra and Bengal; ML also gained support in UP, Bihar and Bengal. This uneven playing field reminds me of recent election victories of Yeltsin and Putin in Russia where opponents did not have equal chances to communicate with the populace.

Already their are lot more songs in Punjab about the Ghadarite martyrs (Bhagat Singh, Uddham Singh, Madanlal Dhingra and Sarabha) than about Jinnah, Nehru and Gandhi combined. This is the reason, both India and Pakistan will not give enough emphasis on heroic tradition of Khilafat Movement, Ghadar Party and Kirti Kissan Movement because it might turn the Images of Jinnah, Nehru and Gandhi into meglomaniac, opportunist and sissy respectively. There is no way they can objectively teach about bombing of Gujranwala from aeroplanes, firing on the demonstrators from the moving trains and Jullianwala Bagh massacre of 538 people and not so apt responses of Nehru and Gandhi after each incident.

jagdeep #114

The way to fight hate-mongers and chauvinists is not not become like them. So, let those who live by the motto ``with malice towards none`` unite and celebrate our common humanity as well as our differences in culture and backgrounds.

Partly to answer a point Diwanji writes, and partly to illustrate a Indian right-wing historical narrative, here is chapter 10 of K.M. Munshi`s ``Somanatha the shrine eternal``.

X. DESTRUCTION OF THE THIRD TEMPLE

In A.D. 1022, Bhima, the son of Nagaraja (the brother of Durlabharaja) by the queen Lakshmidevi (the daughter of the Chahamana of Naddula), came to the throne of Anahilavada Patan. Nagaraja was the grandson of Mularaja whose guardian deity was Somanatha.

Mahmud`s raid on Somanatha was a spectacular venture even if some of the details furnished by the Muslim chroniclers are accepted. On the morning of Monday, October 18, 1025, Mahmud left Ghazni at the head of an army, which consisted of 30,000 regular cavalry. Elaborate preparations were made for food and water. Thirty thousand camels carried the supply of water; in addition, each trooper was provided with two camels for carrying water for him.

The invader rested at Multan, left it on November 26, and began his march through the desert. From Multan to Abu extends one vast, drab and dreary waste of sandy tract. Across this desert, fiery as Gehenna itself, with destruction yawning at every step, marched this reckless host, jubilant with the hopes of the coming loot. Its master, untiring and fierce as the wind which inexorably blew over these untrodden wilds of nature, goaded it on to the ends of his ambition.

According to the Qasida, Mahmud first captured the Ludrava Pass close to the Chiklodara Mata hill near Palanpur. By the end of December, he reached Patan. Bhima was taken by surprise and withdrew to the fort of Kanthkot in Kachchha.

Mahmud rested his army at Patan, replenished his stock of water and provisions, and left it unscathed. The army of Patan met the invader at Mundher—Modhera— and was defeated. Something more must have happened at this stage, which the Muslim chroniclers have omitted in their writings.

Young emperor Bhoja had attained considerable strength. Bhima of Patan was practically his vassal. Saurashtra was ruled by the Abhira king Mandalika, perhaps a feudatory of Bhima. Anarta, Khetaka Mandala and the valley of the Mahi formed part of Malwa; the valley of the Sabarmati was a part of Bhoja`s dominion; and so was Lata. The story of Mahmud putting up one Dabishleem as a temporary ruler at Patan is a later legend. This part of the country was quite rich. What was it that made Mahmud suddenly leave such an easy conquest of a rich country and turn further west into the peninsula? What were the forces of Shakambhari, Medapata, Naddula and Malwa doing when Mahmud was rushing on them with such a mighty force? The only possible explanation is that the confederate forces of old Gurjaradesha stood in a solid phalanx in defence of their land and Mahmud thought it wiser to proceed to Somanatha rather than risk a battle with them.

From Modhera, Mahmud marched on Prabhasa Patan looting Delvada on the way. On January 6, 1026, he invested the fort of Somanatha. It was in charge of Mandalika, the descendant of the Abhira Gruharipu with whom Mularaja had fought.

According to the early Muslim chroniclers, the defenders fought with unabated heroism. At one stage, the army of the Turk entered the town but was driven out before eventide. On the 8th a terrible battle ensued. Fifty thousand Indian warriors laid down their lives in defence of their beloved shrine. Mahmud captured the fort, entered the temple sanctified by centuries of devotion, broke the Linga to pieces, looted the temple and burnt it to the ground.

The Third Temple of beautiful thin-grained red sand stone was thus destroyed. I saw the steps of the temple, the base of the pillars burnt and the debris of its south wall sloping seaward imbedded in the earth.

A sacred city like that of Somanatha armoured principally by the devotion and reverence of the whole country, fell a prey to an army pledged to fanatic destruction of alien shrines.

Mahmud could not enjoy the fruits of his lightning conquest of Somanath. He could not have halted there beyond a month.

Kitab Zain-ul-Akhbar, the earliest source, gives the following account:

``From that place Mahmud turned back, and the reason was that Param Deo, who was the king of the Hindus, was in the way, and the Amir Mahmud feared lest this great victory might be spoiled. He did not come back by the direct way, but took a guide and marching by the way of Mansura and the bank of the Sihun, went towards Multan. His soldiers suffered heavily on the way, both from the dryness of the desert and from the Jatts of Sind. Many animals and a large number of men of the Muslim army perished on the way, and most of the beasts of burden died, till at last they reached Multan.``

Ibn-ul-Athir, writing two hundred years later, mentions the same reason for Mahmud`s retreat, and corroborates Al-Gardizi:

``The Sultan raised his standard with the intention of returning, but as Param Deo, one of the most powerful of the Rajas of Hindustan, had to be met on the way, he did not consider it advisable to fight with him at that time, under all circumstances; he turned towards Multan by way of Sindh. His troops suffered great privations err route, in some places, on account of scarcity of water, and in others, for want of fodder, but at last, after suffering great distress and hardship, he reached Ghazni in the year 417 A.H. (A.D. 1026).``

This explains why Mahmud did not meet with any opposition while entering Kathiawar. The confederate forces of `Paramadeva` had trapped Mahmud in Kathiawar; and he had no chance of an escape except by a precipitate retreat through Kachchha to Sindh. Paramadeva, the King of the Hindus, was in the way. With the army of this king in hot pursuit of him, he started retreating as fast as he could, plundering Kanthkot on the way.;

Mandalika, the Abhira ruler of Somanatha, was also among the confederate princes who pursued Mahmud`s army. Mahmud could not withstand the onslaught. The Tarikh-i-Sorath states that the Muslim army did not make a stand but fled. It was a rout.

``Shah Mahmud took to his heels in dismay and saved his life, but many of his followers of both sexes were captured....Turk, Afghan and Mughal female prisoners, if they happened to be virgins, were accepted as wives by the Indian soldiers.... The bowels of the others, however, were cleansed by means of emetics and purgatives, and thereafter the captives were married to men of similar rank.`` ``Low females were joined to low men. Respectable men were compelled to shave off their beards, and were enrolled among the Shekavat and the Wadhel tribes of Rajputs; whilst the lower kinds were allotted to the castes of Kolis, Khantas, Babrias and Mers.``

The Devala Smriti was in active practice.

Muslim chroniclers corroborate the fact that fever and thirst paralysed the bulk of the army. It was trapped into waterless regions. A large part of the army and most of the beasts of burden perished on the way. At last Mansura in Sindh was reached.

The formidable army, exultant with confidence, which Mahmud had led against Gurjaradesha, returned thinned in number and drooping in spirit. Ultimately, Mahmud, after a short halt at Multan, reached Ghazni on April 2, 1026. This expedition was a disastrous end to a brilliant series of raids. Mahmud gave up his designs on India thereafter.

The later panegyrists of Ghazni loved to sing of this episode as a great feat of Mahmud when, after two hundred years, it had come to be invested with fanciful details.

A wave of righteous hatred against the invader swept over the whole of Northern India. The grim defiance with which Jayapala and Anandapala faced Mahmud only reflected the mood of the country. Al-Biruni in his Indika writing in A.D. 1030 attests to the fanatic hatred felt by the Indians against the mlechchhas. ``Mahmud``, says Al-Biruni, ``utterly ruined the prosperity of the country and performed there wonderful exploits by which Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims.``

From this time, Shiva the Destroyer, was the God of Resistance and in His name millions laid down their lives in defence of their faith and land, till in A.D. 1665 and thereafter again in His name, the South under Shivaji and his successors with `Har Har Mahadeva` on its lips rose in resistance and destroyed the Mughal Empire.



-arun gupta

[from my file archive]

A book on Mughal architecture, by R. Nath, says the following:

`` It is surprising that though they built large and magnificient mosques in Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Egypt and Spain, the Muhammedans have no written text as to the construction of their sacred architecture``, and no prescribed rules except that the congregation would face the Ka`ba in Mecca, and the Qiblah would mark its direction.

The Hindus however were very particular about such matters, and around the middle of the 15th century, in the Gujarat- Rajasthan region, they wrote a ``Vastu-text`` on the construction of the masjid for the first time.

The text is in Sanskrit, and parts of it are lost, in particular parts that might have dealt with the minars and domes.

Why the Hindus might be concerned if a mosque was built in a wrong way, the author says, is because guilds of Hindu artisans were constantly employed on the construction of mosques, and they treated this subject technically, over and above any possible religious bias.

They would worship the Vastu-Purusa at the time of laying the foundations, as they would normally do in case of a temple, and follow all other rituals of their own regardless of the concurrence of their patron which may not have been available to them. Their art was their dharma and an entirely technical matter for them.

The text was prepared at their behest by the Brahmana Acharya to provide technical,almost detached knowledge, on the subject as soon as its perfectly standardised form evolved after lot of experimentation - and this too was also treated all along as a technical matter.

The text is in form of dialogues between Viswakarman and his manas-putra Jaya. The latter, having listened to details of various Hindu and secular structures,urged upon the former to explain to him the nature, proportions, rhythm, form and types of temple built by the Muhammedans under the Satvika-Bhava ( the sentiment of godly adoration).

Visvakarman replied: `` Their temple is called `Rehamana-Suralaya` (abode of the God Rehamana, viz., Allah). There is no image, and there they worship, through dhyana (contemplation), the formless, attributeless, all-pervading Supreme God whom they call Rehamana (Allah). After working out the aya and vyaya, the levelled ground should be marked into eight or ten parts according to Sutra-Pramana. If it is .......(tons of technical details) .....``

----

(Vishwakarma is the divine architect, in Roman mythology, he would be Vulcan.)

---

-arun gupta

Pakistani schools play a major role in creating future Mujahideens

In order to advance from the fifth grade, Pakistani students must be able to identify ``forces that may be working against Pakistan,`` according to the government curriculum guidelines. They must also know in detail about Pakistan`s three wars with India, be able to identify the differences between Hindus and Muslims and explain the need for an independent Muslim state. Perhaps more worrisome for efforts to promote peace, they must be able to make speeches on the ideals of the jihad (Islamic holy war) and martyrdom.

The impact of that curriculum becomes obvious in interviews with students. ``India is our enemy and it should be destroyed,`` said Fatima Omardin, 12, a student at the Bhair Sodian school. The town is 15 miles from Pakistan`s border with India. She added that not all Indians were enemies, saying ``Muslim Indians are good. Hindus are bad.``

Asked where she learned that, the other female students piped up, ``The teacher told us.``

Even more radical philosophies are propagated in many of the Islamic seminaries, whose number has doubled from 3 ,000 to nearly 6,000 during the past five years. The schools, known as madrassas, are widely blamed for the rise in militant Islamic fundamentalism in Pakistan. They are exempt from the state curriculum and lure students from the poorest families with the promise of free tuition, room and board.

Muhammad Shabir, 12, a student at the Arabic Farroquia madrassa in Arifwala town, in central Punjab, said his parents pulled him out of a government primary school last year because the teacher never came. Now, he said, ``I can concentrate on the glory of jihad.``

In reply to Temporal : I read Diwanji`s article on rediff.com, and wanted to discuss it. Thanks for posting it here !

Some general comments : Yes, history in high school is very much about kings and battles and monuments built, who wrote or composed stuff that we remember today and general economic conditions that prevailed during the reigns of particular kings. Apart from general denunciations of the caste system, caste is not touched upon -- in this, Amberish Diwanji is correct.

Caste, in general, has been debilitating to India. However, the complexities of caste are much greater than Diwanji`s article envisages. That is why, perhaps, school books do not touch upon it. There are plenty of scholarly books on the phenomenon of caste, and its effects, as you will find, e.g., examine the University of California catalog by telnetting to melvyl.berkeley.edu and doing a search.

The problem is that books that examine all sides of an issue are usually boring to the general reader.

Some particular comments : I am not a historian, so take all I say with liberal doses of NaCl.

1. The Marathas and peasants -- I`ve read that peasant armies preyed on the losers of battles, so e.g., the Maratha army lost significantly in the retreat from Panipat because of such raiders.

2. The Mughal empire was in reality a Rajput-Mughal alliance, at least including much of Aurangzeb`s reign. The answer to one of Diwanji`s questions lies in that.

3. The learned Brahmin never socializing with the Shudra : I am not so sure. E.g., there is a Sanskrit ``Vastu`` text, an architect`s guide, from 14th century Gujarat, which tells how to design build a mosque. The author who describes the text says that Hindu workmen used to build mosques, and the workers gave the requirements to the Sanskrit scribe; Sanskrit, like Latin, was the way of formalizing and making permanent knowledge.

4. Regarding prohibition of sailing abroad -- this is not just an Indian, caste-associated phenomenon. A student of history will find out that the merchants of China were similarly proscribed, and China suffered a similar stagnation. This has then, to do with economic and political power, and not so much to do with caste.

Incidentally, Ghaznavid raids and later invaders caused Gujarati princes, traders, to pick up family and belongings and sail away permanently to

Indonesia, etc.

5. I`ve mentioned this before : Akbar had a choice and chose to forbid importation of a printing press from Europe. I think most Indian rulers have understood the dangers of literacy and have hindered it, and again, while caste may be implicated in part of how the control worked, it is not the entire story. I`ve heard an anecdote from modern Pakistan of two landowners fighting for the new school to be placed in the other feudal`s village -- they too understand how literacy will undermine them. I presume caste has nothing to do with that.

-arun gupta

This is interesting.Germans dont want us but still use our software.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/270400/detFRO07.htm

Since the following column discussing history and historians role from the Indian perspective
has a direct bearing on Hoodbhoy, I am reproducing it here in its entirety.

t
________________________________________

Amberish K Diwanji

Caste off!


One of the tragedies of our history books is that they do not look at history holistically, but rather as specific events of battles won or lost and so on. In the bargain, we fail to learn our lessons completely, which is perhaps the primary purpose of reading history.

Today, there is an urgent need for a study of comparative histories and for linking our political history with the social and economic currents of the time, otherwise we will never comprehend our past -- its glories and its tragedies.

If there is one area historians are wont to skip, it is mentioning the negative role of caste. Given that most of our past and present historians are from the so-called upper castes, there is a natural inclination to avoid mentioning how casteism ensured India`s perennial defeats, why when Europe began its Renaissance and Reformation leading to its pre-eminence, India with all its advantages continued to languish.

A few examples of the pernicious role played by casteism in Indian history, rarely mentioned in our books:

*Shivaji was the first Indian king to hire Dalits in his army (ref: Defence of India by Jaswant Singh). Much like the blacks in the US Army in World War II, the Dalits lived in separate camps, but fought for Shivaji. These hardy men, used to living in difficult conditions, were an asset in his various campaigns.

But when the Peshwas rose to power, their natural inclination as Brahmins saw them put an end to the practice of hiring Dalits. The martial Dalits, not at all keen to go back to their traditional vocations, found employment in the British Army (Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar`s father was one such soldier). These very Dalits were instrumental in helping the British defeat the Marathas later.

*When the Mughal empire was faltering, the three greatest challenges came from peasant-soldier communities -- the Marathas, Sikhs and Jats. Most history books tend to look at these groups in terms of Hindu-Muslim warfare or Hindu consciousness; few pay attention to why the peasants rose while the Kshatriyas did not and even the Rajputs stayed quiet. And what are the reasons that while Rana Pratap lost to Akbar, Borphuken in Assam repelled Mughal invasions? Is it because the Assamese army was less caste-conscious and therefore more representative? (It is another matter that we know so little about the history of the Northeast. How many have even heard of Borphuken?)

*Is it that when Mahmud of Ghazni attacked the Somnath temple 11 times (or more), there was no defence simply because our caste system did not allow it? The upper castes were always a minority in numbers, the Kshatriyas among them were only a small segment of the upper castes. How could this small segment, divided into clans, resist Mahmud`s huge army?

But why did the peasants not take up arms? Was it because the Brahmins and Kshatriyas did not want the peasants to protect the temple? Or is it because the peasants did not even have access to the Somnath temple and therefore cared little for it? Why did the temple priests not raise an army with the temple`s huge wealth?

*Returning to Maratha history, it is well known that in the mid-18th century, the Marathas and the British were the competing influences on land and the Arabian Sea. When the Royal Navy finally defeated the Maratha navy, one reason was a small device called the screw, invented a few years earlier. The British cannons on board the ships could take aim with the aid of the screw, allowing great precision in hitting the target. The Marathas still pushed and pulled the cannon turrets, and aim was a casualty.

Inventing the screw links the blacksmith with intelligence. This happened in Europe, but not in India, because the learned Brahmin probably never touched tools and never socialised with the Shudra. The Shudra, who worked with tools, lacked the most basic education and could never think beyond doing exactly what his father and grandfather had done! He was never trained to think beyond the present task. Even if he did, who sought his opinion?

*Tipu Sultan, it is well known, was trying to invent rockets. The sultan, against whom were ranged the British, the Nizam and the Marathas (though in the last battle of 1799 the Marathas stayed away), also tried his hand at international diplomacy by seeking the help of Napoleon (who was then in Egypt), but in vain.

Why did the Marathas not do the same? Invention involved the Brahmin`s knowledge working with the Shudra`s craft, but no Brahmin was willing to pollute himself by suffering a Shudra`s company. No wonder that while the British were introducing field rifles with awesome effect, the Marathas were still using swords and lances!

The navy is another story. By declaring that crossing the seas meant a loss of caste, the Brahmins gave India her greatest loss. International diplomacy was impossible and the Brahmin-Kshatriya elite stayed on land. Shivaji`s navy was led by the so-called lower castes, but once these lower castes became Sanskritised, they often obeyed caste rules and quit plying the ships.

Incidentally, the Battle of Waterloo was fought in 1815 and the Third (and last) Anglo-Maratha War in 1818. What turn would history have taken if the Marathas, after the Second Anglo-Maratha war in 1803, had sought an alliance with the French?

But the Maratha elite then was composed of Chitpavan Brahmins, and no Brahmin would cross the seas to meet the French. No negotiation meant no diplomatic alliance, and in quick succession the British went on to become the masters of everything between Europe and Australia! Hindu caste consciousness thus only helped the British.

Incidentally, a school of thought believes the Brahmins banned crossing the seas to curb the power of the merchants of South India who had acquired huge wealth from the Western and Southeast Asian trade routes. The Brahmins thus handed over the trade (and cultural and political) routes to the rising Arab power, allowing Islam to replace Hinduism in Indonesia. The Brahmin order stopped Hindus from going overseas to Southeast Asia just when the Muslims began arriving.

Hopefully, some historian will study the debilitating effect casteism had on India and Indians` ability to defend their country. The horrendous caste structure ensured the lack of education of the masses (something that prevails even today) and our economic weakness. It strengthened the system of heredity in succession, which after two generations usually produces incapable leaders. We need to study the past more thoroughly to prepare for the future.

TAILPIECE: Would the British have ever created their empire in India if they had NOT lost the American War? I don`t think so. No matter how powerful the British were to become, no power could have maintained two empires (in the Americas and in India) simultaneously. The American victory in their War of Independence was India`s loss, since it helped the British concentrate east of the Atlantic in general and on India in particular.

Amberish K Diwanji