On Teachers’ Day, let’s draw up some new timetables

Recently, there have been repetitive demands from both the government and the political leadership for the reformation of this unique seminary system; both now busy conceiving plans for this revamp. But, these advocates of modernisation aren’t sufficiently aware of the methodology to follow and the outcome to achieve. Their basic agenda is only to create a trouble-free atmosphere for an easy intervention in this largest religious network of Muslims to protect their political interests.

Before we set out modernising the madrassa curriculum out of the blue, we have to keep in mind some internal realities of this seminary system and its historic contributions to the richness of the composite Indian culture. This will help us realise that observations about madrassas creating fanaticism and conservative mindsets in the community are groundless.

The madrassas had an enormous role in spreading the Islamic concept of equality (Musawat) in India’s caste and creed-ridden social milieu. This core concept of social justice made Islam acceptable in India as a religion and way of life. Later on, it led to the synthesis of ideas from Islam and the Bhakti movement.

The madrassas also produced social reformers: great renaissance men like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Maulana Altaf Husain Hali and Moulana Shibli. Even as they advocated modern education for the community, they created an awareness and atmosphere to promote scientific and secular education without touching the sanctity of the religious education system.

Since its inception over two centuries ago with the establishment of the Deoband seminary, the Indian Madrassa network has been following a curriculum of its own, namely Dars-I-Nizami. Almost all Sunni madrassas, whether of Deobandi, Barelvi, or Ahl-e-Hadith persuasion, follow the same standard Nizami course of studies adopted by the Deoband seminary in 1867. The teachings of the madrassas are mainly in subjects like fiqha, mantaq, tafsir, hisab, geometry and astronomy besides Arabic. This is a combination of the ‘transmitted sciences’ and ‘rational sciences’. This syllabus has remained unchanged for over two centuries. Moreover, the community has a strong belief that there is no room for change in the basics of this syllabus as they are centered on the Quran and the Hadith. Therefore, the talked-about modernisation is possible only in the physical infrastructure like buildings and providing internet facilities.

Kerala, where Madrassas and secular schools have been functioning separately for over half a century, is a success story. Here, madrassa education in no way affects a child’s school attendance and performance, but supplements it – madrassas are being established adjacent to public schools, unlike the mosque-centric north Indian counterparts. They adjust class schedule according to school time, follow the same medium of instruction, English or Malayalam, of the adjacent school, in addition to Arabic as a compulsory subject.

The main reason for the backwardness of Muslims in north India is lack of sufficient inclusive public educational institutions in Muslim pockets. Muslims need educational opportunities, both in professional and non-professional courses, but certainly not exclusive Madrassas and marginalised Urdu schools. The visionary Muslim intelligentsia of late 19th and early 20th century led by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Maulana Shibli and many others have founded English medium schools all across north India. The excuse of the ‘Muslim-friendly’ government at the center for opening Urdu schools is that ‘it is the duty of a responsible government to protect cultural identity of the Muslim community in the country’. It may be a befitting justification for a government programme, it is a mercy killing of the north Indian Muslims and Indian secularism.

Why should the government be more bothered about the cultural identity and religion-centric activities of the Muslims than their inclusive secular educational development? Simple, the notion of cultural identity is nothing but disguised marginalisation of the community from the developed mainstream. The government is simply exploiting the north Indian Muslim community’s political and social leadership failure after independence by giving more space to madarssa education. The community, in turn, loses its chance to be mainstreamed through education and to enable itself to protect the cultural identity on its own way. And, what it gains is nothing but the hostility of other religious societies, especially the majority community. The only real gainer are ‘political parties’ of different hues that are offering unwise programmes; with this they can easily hold a big road show of Muslim welfare in the forthcoming elections. But at the same time, the north Indian Muslim intelligentsia, including Ulemas, should take steps to set up more secular educational institutions in Muslim dominated regions as done by their peers in the 19th century.

The writer is vice chancellor, University of Calicut, Kerala.