Historical Controversy
Author: Dr. Anand Deep
Published on: December 10, 2001
The controversy began when government’s move to amend certain school level history textbooks became public. On November 23, Minister of State for Human Resource Development, Rita Verma, informed the upper house of parliament that four history textbooks were found to contain “factual errors, biases and coloration.’ Steps were being taken to correct them. Objectionable references had been found in renowned historian Romila Thapar's book Ancient India' prescribed for Class VI and Ram Sharan Sharma's 'Ancient India' prescribed for Class XI students. Two other textbooks, one by Arjun Dev and Indira Dev prescribed for class XI, and another by Satish Chandra on medieval India contained objectionable matter. According to the minister, these books were guilty of hurting the sentiments of religious minorities and cultural communities. The National Council for education research and Training (NCERT) has been entrusted with the task of preparing refined textbooks without such objectionable matter. These new books would be ready for the next academic year. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has directed schools across India to delete objectionable portions and ensure that they are not taught or discussed in classes with immediate effect.
All these historians are highly respected in the academic community for their calibre. Their books have been in the syllabus for as long as four decades. Romila Thapar’s is on the scene since 1966 with a revision in 1987. Therefore, the charge of hurting sentiments appeared rather late. Let us look at some of the text objectionable to our present government:
“For special guests beef was served as a mark of honour” (Class VI, Romila Thapar)
“Cattle wealth slowly decimated because cows and bullocks were killed in numerous Vedic sacrifices … the brahmanical reaction began as a result of the policy of Ashoka. He... derided superfluous rituals performed by women. This naturally affected the income of the Brahmanas.” (Class XI, R S Sharma)
“Archaeological evidence should be considered far more important than long family trees given in the Puranas. The Puranic tradition could be used to date Rama of Ayodhya around 2000 BC, but extensive excavations in Ayodhya do not show any settlements around that date.” (R.S Sharma)
“Jats founded their state at Bharatpur from where they conducted plundering raids in the regions around.” (Class VIII, Arjun Dev and Indira Arjun Dev)
“In 1675, Guru Tegh Bahadur was arrested and executed. The official explanation for this... is that after his return from Assam, the Guru, in association with one Hafiz Adam, resorted to plundering and raping, laying waste the whole province of Punjab.” (Class XI, Satish Chandra)
The problem with these passages is that they attack a sanctified image of Hinduism. Hindus are known to worship the cow. Reference to beef-eating and cow slaughter for Vedic rituals leaves a feeling of discomfort. A pro-Hindu government lead by the BJP and guided by aggressive Hindu organisations like the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangha cannot tolerate such remarks. The last two passages referring to Jaats being marauders and the Sikh guru plundering and raping too is highly objectionable to the two communities respectively. In all,
the total number of pages to be deleted from these textbooks is just sixteen. The key questions to ask in this context are two. Firstly, if these references have stayed in textbooks for four decades, then how did they become suddenly objectionable? So objectionable that they demand immediate deletion? Secondly, if these references truly offend the sentiments of communities, then why should anyone come in the way of their removal? We might ask a third question. Are these references as well as their removal based on historical evidence? Or is the government erasing them merely on account of sentimental problems?
As government’s intention became public, the opposition immediately launched an attack. The congress, Samajvadi party and the Communists alleged that the government was attempting to rewrite history with a Hindu leaning. The opposition alleged that education was being saffronised. Saffronisation is the Hindu equivalent of talibanisation. Congress leader Arjun singh went as far as stating that BJP was Talibanising education, which would not be tolerated. Ultimately, Congress spokesman Jaipal Reddy put the whole issue in perspective. The opposition is not against a review of history textbooks. However, textbooks must be reviewed systematically and transparently by acknowledged historians. The opposition is not against change. It is the manner of such change that has sparked the controversy. Motivated rewriting of history textbooks is dangerous.
The ruling party on the other hand feels that history as it is being taught today is prejudiced against Hinduism. It ridicules Hindu culture. Such partial history needs corrections. As the Prime minister himself stated that if history is one sided, it must be changed.
The academic community too got submerged in the controversy. NCERT is under a contractual obligation to obtain prior permission from the author before deleting portions from his textbook. None of the historians were consulted on this occasion. NCERT chief Prof. JS Rajpoot (a physicist) clearly states that he did not find it necessary to consult these four historians as they are not the only historians in India. He refused to disclose the names of those who are reviewing the books thereby making room for speculation that RSS activists are doing the job. Moreover, how can you ensure that a particular topic shall not be discussed in the classroom. Are we getting ready for a Taliban style thought police in the future? In fact, the government has ensured widespread publicity to a topic of little interest by its action. These passages are all over the media thanks to this controversy. Academics feel that BJP is promoting a communal interpretation of history. Everything positive in India occurred during Hindu rule. Muslims and British only destroyed India. Achievements during this era are to be erased and seen only in a negative light. The effort is similar to that of Pakistani historians who delinked themselves from India and somehow attached themselves directly to the Middle East. According to Bipan Chandra, it’s a sinister effort to communalise young minds. Romila thapar objected to NCERT’s claim that it had received 50000 complaints against these textbooks. If such complaints were received, then where are they? To sum up, academics on one hand feel that it is a political move to bend history in favour of party ideology. RSS workers on the other hand justify this move on the ground that they are correcting earlier leanings of history duly promoted by congress people.
To conclude, wisdom lies in taking history out of a myth and fantasy syndrome. Young school children must be taught professionally. Give them both views and let them debate on the basis of context. Politicians and political organisations must never treat history as their handmaid. Humanity has seen such good historians. Why can’t we have a nice history?
Source
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/12355/86895 Perversion of History Text Books:
Judiciary to the Rescue?
M. S. Rahi*
* M.A. LL.M., Ph.D. (Law) Advocate, 2040 Sector 21-C, Chandigarh.
The question of the future of Sikhism and the Sikhs has once again assumed primal importance. That, too, immediately after the celebrations of the tercentenary of the Khalsa with great fanfare. The historic event, instead of showing the strength of the Sikhs and their religion, projected their weaknesses. The opponents, sensing this, renewed their attacks on the distinct identity of the Sikhs, without foreseeing the consequences for Indian society. The values on which the constitutional Indian polity is based are being eroded. The cultural pluralism of India is under attack - and the Sikhs are at risk.
Freedom of Religious Practice: It is not just the outwearing of the Sikhs, which makes them distinct. The claim of the Sikhs to distinct identity is primarily based on their attitude to life - to live with self-respect, paying whatever price has to be paid for that, and ultimately martyrdom, if that has to be embraced in consonance with the high principles of Sikhism as laid down by the founder of Sikhism - die fighting, and no submission to injustice. That is the history of the Sikhs as established by Guru Nanak by his passionate rebuff to Mughal invader Babar, followed by Guru Arjun and Guru Teg Bahadur by their principled martyrdom, and by the spirited fight given by Guru Hargobind and Guru Gobind Singh against the brutal attacks on the Sikhs by the Mughal emperors Jahangir and Aurangzeb.
The Sikhs triumphed as long as they followed the principles of Sikhism. Whenever they departed from principles they suffered and failed. That is why a serious attempt is being made to distort the distinctive features of Sikh history, to make them forget their true legacy. Unknown to most Sikhs they are being robbed of the distinctive features of their history and culture. The glorious edifice of Sikhism, which the Sikh Gurus had raised with their sweat and blood, is being dismantled brick by brick.
Distortion: The few instances are from the recent happenings, and from the legal fight which has been going on for last more than five years. The legal fight has now reached the Supreme Court of India. All these instances have long-range consequences, harming the future of the Sikhs and Sikhism.
Distortions in History: that Guru Gobind Singh "served" to support Bahadur Shah:
A major distortion of Sikh History concerns Guru Gobind Singh. It is claimed that Guru Gobind Singh, after his long struggle against the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, joined the army of emperor Bahadur Shah. This innocuous looking statement was inserted in "Modern India - A History Textbook for Class XII". The thought behind this single line, if magnified, has the potential of putting the whole history of Sikhism upside down. It gives rise to multiple questions and doubts. The personality of Guru Gobind Singh, his vision of life, and the purpose of his long struggle against injustice and persecution stand questioned. A modern Indian historian, Prof. Bipin Chandra of Jawahar Lal Nehru University, has cut the great personality of Guru Gobind Singh - unparalleled in courage and determination - to a petty size. The argument given by the authorities of NCERT is that they wish to develop a "scientific temper" and inquisitive curiosity among the young students.
However, a young student of class XII of a school in Chandigarh could not stomach this strange "scientific temper" in April 1995. He innocently revolted against such writing, and stood up against his teacher for this untruth being taught in the class. This gave rise to litigation in the High Court, and the Govt. of India and its agencies strongly defended this modern version of Guru Gobind Singh’s personality. When questioned in the court, they miserably failed to substantiate such an untrue statement. The author, from sheer fear, did not even put an appearance in the court.
The Honorable Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice R. P. Sethi (Now Judge of the Supreme Court of India) wrote in his historic judgment like this: "The State is under a Constitutional obligation to preserve and protect the interests of Sikh community. While protecting their interests, the respondent/ authorities are under an obligation to refrain from becoming a party to such controversial writing, which may ultimately hurt the feelings of Sikhs community as a whole or a part of it. The writings about religious Gurus cannot be permitted to be justified on the basis of disputed and debatable historical truths, lest it may destroy the very secular fabric of the Constitution."
Official Arrogant: However, in spite of such a judgment, the government of India and its instrumentality, the NCERT, did not delete the objectionable remarks from the history textbook. Two more editions of the book were published. Then a contempt petition against the director of the NCERT was filed in October 1998. At first, the Director refused to receive the summons of the Court. Ultimately, the personal service was ordered to be effected by the court. K. K. Gopalan was served in his office. However, later on, an application was moved that K. K. Gopalan had retired in 1993 much earlier to the filing of the writ petition itself. Many other small legal tricks were played in order to harass the petitioners. When finally cornered in the court, the Director of NCERT produced the book in the court after deleting the objectionable remarks in July 1999. The lesson is that the objectionable remarks were not due to any inadvertence, but the result of a deep-rooted conspiracy and planning to distort the History of the Sikhs with a definite purpose.
Guru Teg Bahadur: Disturber of Peace in Punjab?
The second instance is more serious. The personality of all the Sikh Gurus has been put under a black shadow. It has been written in the book, "Medieval India" - A History Textbook for Class XI, written by Prof. Satish Chandra of Jawahar Lal University, claiming to be another doyen of modern Indian History. He writes, "The struggle of the Sikh Gurus against the Mughal emperors was personal and political rather than religious". He further writes that "the reasons of martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur are not clear... but Persian sources tell us that Guru Teg Bahadur had joined hands with one Hafiz Adam and used to create disturbances in Punjab". The writer forgets that Guru Teg Bahadur of history and Guru Teg Bahadur of Sikh religion cannot be two different personalities. Guru Teg Bahadur’s ‘bani’ as enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib is the symbol of his deep spirituality. It is also a fact of history that Guru Teg Bahadur is one of the earliest expounders of the human rights movement - said to be a modern phenomenon. He himself not being a Hindu, opposed to Bahramical teachings, even then gave his life to defend the rights of his ideological opponents - an act unique in the history of the world. But, what Dr Satish Chandra has written - to be taught in the Schools of India about Guru Teg Bahadur - is a travesty of truth to the memory of great Guru - said to be "sheet anchor of the honour of India" (Hind di chaader).
The Government of India and the NCERT were requested to delete the objectionable remarks against the Sikh Gurus. But instead of considering the request of the petitioners as directed by the High Court, the petitioners received a very curt reply from one, Professor Arjun Dev, Dean (Academic) NCERT, saying "the petition betrays a total lack of even elementary understanding on the part of the petitioners of the academic discipline of history and the academic debates among historians. The statement regarding Aurangzeb’s policy of religious intolerance and persecution to convert people of other religions to Islam are highly simplistic. The allegations made against the text book were without any foundation and reflected a lack of understanding of the contents of this text book as well as of the entire trend of historical researches and studies, in the history of Medieval India over the past many decades".
The petitioners were totally dismayed and were unable to understand how the established fact of Sikh history could be changed without any cogent evidence. They were left with no remedy except to further pursue the matter in the High Court.
It is strange that Government of India and its agencies raised an objection in the writ petition that the use of the Judiciary and the Constitution by the petitioners is "perverse" for defending their rights regarding distortions of their history. They have said that the Constitution is not meant for such purpose. The Division Bench admitted the writ petition, with specific directions for a hearing on 7-12-1998, keeping in view the seriousness of the subject involved. Unfortunately, the Writ petition was not heard, and all pleas to grant the stay against the publication of the new edition of the book were rejected with the remarks that the petitioners raised a question of fact only, whereas the petitioners had specifically prayed that their fundamental rights under Article 25 and 29 (1) were being violated.
In a para of the application it was written, "that it had become a public knowledge that the distorted history, with objectionable remarks against the Sikh Gurus, is being taught through the disputed book". Even Arun Shourie, in his recent book, has specifically pointed out that distorted history has been written in the book Medieval India - A history textbook of Class-XI. "there was no atmosphere of confrontation between the Sikhs and the Mughal rulers during this period," says Satish Chandra. "Nor was there any systematic persecution of the Hindus, and hence, no occasion for the Sikhs or any group or sect to stand forth as the champion of the Hindus against religious persecution. The occasional conflict between the Gurus and the Mughal rulers was personal and political rather than religious. Despite some display of orthodoxy by Shah Jahan at the beginning of his reign and a few acts of intolerance, such as the demolition of ‘new’ temples, he was not narrow in his outlook, which was further tempered towards the end of his reign by the influence of his liberal son, Dara." That being the case, what do these eminent historians have to say about what is enshrined in the Granth Sahib.... the account not of some merely eminent historian but of Guru Nanak., of what Guru Nanak had been witness to? Let us hear these eminent secularists, then, declare that this plea of Guru Nanak was a concoction!
Unfortunately, no notice was taken of such historic facts. The Letters Patent Appeal was filed against that order in February 2000, but the Letters Patent Bench dismissed the appeal without deciding the real issues raised in the appeal. The Petitioners pleaded that the objectionable remarks cannot be allowed to be made part of the school history textbook, and the government machinery cannot be allowed to denigrate the personalities of the Sikh Gurus, and violate the fundamental rights of the Sikhs.
A review petition was filed against that order, as there were many apparent mistakes on the face of the order. It was specifically mentioned in the review petition "that in face of the resolutions of the World Sikh Council, signed by a former judge of the Supreme Court of India, Chief Khalsa Diwan, SGPC and Institute of Sikh Studies, affidavits of two eminent historians, prominent writers, one former Chief Justice of this Hon’ble High Court, all disputing the correctness of the facts as mentioned in the impugned paragraph of the book, it cannot be said by the NCERT, or accepted, that the textbook is an unbiased account of the Historical events and does not cast any aspersion on the Sikh Gurus. The contradiction between the impugned write-up in the book and the affidavit of Satish Chandra, the author of the textbook, at page number 90 of the paperbook, is obvious when he says, "it is my understanding that Guru Teg Bahadur refused to compromise with his cherished religious beliefs and gave up his life in defending them. He stands as a fighter against injustices of all types. His mission was taken up after his death by his son and successor Guru Gobind Singh".
Then why the long struggle of the Sikh Gurus against the Mughal emperors has been presented in the impugned para as ‘political and personal rather than religious’, and Guru Teg Bahadur is shown as creating "disturbances in the Punjab"? It is difficult to reconcile these two opinions of the author himself. It is also not understandable what more aspersions can be cast upon the Sikh Gurus by the author in the impugned textbook." However, the Learned Judges dismissed the review petition with a cryptic order - "no merit: dismissed". The matter has been taken to the Supreme Court of India by filing a Special Leave Petition, which is still pending.
Perversion: Another case also reveals strange facts. A representation was given to the Chief Minister, Punjab in 1998, regarding objectionable remarks against the Sikh Gurus in a book, "Aurangzeb Aur Hinduon ke Saath Samband" by Akhilesh Jayswal and Dr. (Mrs.) Rita Joshi, Professor Medieval History, Allahabad University. The Chief Minister referred the matter to the Advocate General Punjab, for legal opinion. There, one Learned Additional Advocate General, after going through the contents of the book reached the conclusion, "the whole story has been maliciously concocted by them to malign and defame the Sikh Gurus and the Sikh community. Provocative remarks translated from the book which fall within the mischief of Section 295A of I.P.C. are given as under, "...The Sikh Gurus who succeeded Guru Nanak, said good-bye to spiritualism and climbed down to mundane considerations, they indulged in active politics ad collected tithe.... In truth, Guru Teg Bahadur of his own volition wanted to get himself killed as there was an acute tussle for the Gaddi, Guruship, and there were serious bickering and disunity among the Sikhs. The Guru wanted to get himself killed so that his sacrifice could bring unity among the Sikhs and the organizations could become strong and healthy. Obviously, Aurangzeb was not even remotely, responsible for the death of Guru Teg Bahadur and to bring a charge of murder of the Guru against Aurangzeb is a gross injustice to Aurangzeb."
However, the learned Addl. Advocate General gave gratuitous opinion that "before a final decision is taken in the matter, a thoughtful consideration be given to the fact that peace in Punjab has come after lot of turmoil. In the present circumstances, peace is very fragile. Sometime issues though genuine should be ignored as they may not only raise unsavory controversy but may add fuel to the fire".
Apathy: It seems that the Punjab government after ‘thoughtful consideration’ decided to compromise the honour of the Sikh Gurus with the ‘fragile peace in Punjab’! The law of the land was not put into operation to bring guilty to the book, and due to this reason, other such writers may feel encouraged to write much more malicious and false things about the Sikh Gurus and spoil peace in the whole country in the times to come. The history of these cases reveals how serious matters pertaining to the honour and dignity of the Sikh Gurus are being taken casually by the concerned authorities.
Right to Wear Kirpan at the mercy of Police: The other case pending in the High Court is regarding the fundamental right of wearing and carrying of Kirpans, as per the Article 25 of the Constitution of India. In 1985, the Union Territory of Chandigarh issued instructions not to allow persons carrying any kind of weapon on their person, to enter the premises of the High Court. One Harbans Singh Ghuman, a veteran Akali leader and former M.L.A. who is a "baptized" Sikh, was stopped from entering the building of the High Court. The argument with the officer on duty was of no avail. The provisions of the Constitution of India allowing the Sikhs to wear and carry Kirpans, deemed included in the profession of Sikh religion, did not carry any weight with the officer.
In sheer desperation, Ghuman filed a writ petition No. 2164 of 1985, challenging those unconstitutional instructions. The Division bench admitted the writ petition to full bench on 13-05-1985. When the matter was placed before the full bench of three judges, they further referred the matter to the full bench of five judges. Since then many full benches have been constituted, but this short matter has not been decided so far.
The Union Territory in its reply made strange submissions; it is alleged in their submission that "there is no way of distinguishing between a Amritdhari and non-Amritdhari Sikh... It is the duty of every truly religions man to help in the maintenance of public order. Nothing done in the interest of public order can be said to be breach of tenets of any religion". This case also shows the attitude of the authorities towards the fundamental rights of the Sikhs, which are enshrined in the Constitution of India. The Indian Airlines has also issued such type of instructions. The innocent Amritdhari Sikhs are harassed and humiliated at public places. What should the Sikhs do in such circumstances? Follow the command of their Guru, insist on the provisions of the Constitutions, or follow the instructions of the authorities in the name of "public order"? The controversy deserves to be resolved at the earliest.
Memorial to Guru Nanak: The other case that deserves mention is of possession of the land for the purpose of constructing Guru Nanak memorial at Jagannath Puri. Incidentally, Puri on the coast of Orissa, was hallowed by Guru Nanak’s first Udasi in 1497 AD, where Guru Nanak had recited the hymn, ‘Gagan mein thaal....Kaisi aarti hoi’, which is part of Guru Granth Sahib. There is no Gurdwara or any kind of memorial, reminding the people of the historical importance of Guru Nanak’s visit to Puri. Whatever little is there, is in the possession of Udasis, more in the form of a temple than a Gurdwara.
In 1993, Guru Nanak Universal Brotherhood Society was formed with the aim of raising Guru Nanak’s memorial at Puri; and after relentless efforts of five years, a small piece of land was secured from the Orissa government on lease of Rs.6.35 lacs. Only possession was to be delivered. The society spent lacs of rupees in pursuing the case, and preparing the site plans, and a unique model of the memorial in the shape of IKONKAR, first of its own kind. All documents and plans were submitted to the concerned authorities. Then suddenly a letter was received from the office of the Collector, Puri on 26.10.99, saying. "The Collector has been pleased to drop the alienation case no. 35/97 for the time being due to want of clearance from security point of view." When the society represented, having paid Rs. 11000 to CM’s Relief Fund for the victims of super-cyclone, it was decided, at the highest level, to hand over the possession of the site in favour of the Society for constructing a Memorial celebrating Guru Nanak’s stay in Puri, it is not understandable, what kind of security problems arose in constructing the memorial. Thereupon, the Collector, Puri on 15.04.2000, gave personal hearing. But after that, nothing has been heard from the concerned authorities.
The Sikhs as a distinctive minority have to keenly watch the changing social and legal scenario, because their destiny is intimately connected with the fast changes taking place around them. They would have to think: Are all these changes in history deliberate? Serious minded Sikhs should sometime get up at ambrosial hours, as ordained by the Guru, and after remembrance of the name of Almighty, also think; from where they have come and where they are going or being made to go? What would be the destiny of the coming generations of the Sikhs? The answers are not easy to find in a society governed by the principle of majoritinarism. But submit to injustice is against the principles of Sikhism and against the teachings of Guru Nanak; to live with dignity under all circumstances.
For a life of dignity, the Sikhs have to redesign their conduct in the light of the teachings of the Gurus and the glorious traditions of Sikh history. Determined persistence to keep alive the pristine glory of Sikhism on the part of the Sikhs is the only way out. The parameters of Fundamental Rights, as defined in the constitution of India, should not be transgressed with such impunity.
Source :
http://www.sikhreview.org/july2001/pers1.htm 