This post was first published by Farhan Rahman on his Facebook timeline.
People say that education is the panacea for all social evils, including Communalism.
If you look around you would find that most of the bigots are the ones who are most educated – Doctors, Engineers, Bureaucrats, Professors, Technocrats. It is not just education, but the form of education that matters.
1. When you teach them at schools that Muslims were invaders, you inadvertently create a sense of righteousness among them that this land belongs to them and not to the aborigines, whom they subjugated 5000 years back and forced them to live in social periphery, deprived – economically, politically and socially.
Had you taught them objectively, it would have inculcated in them it a sense of guilt and they would have voiced their concerns today over the present plight of these aborigines.
2. When historians brazenly ingrain young minds that Muslims destroyed thousands of Hindu temples, without objectively mentioning the names of those “thousands” of temples, and the times in which they were destroyed, then you are not educating them, rather you are polluting them communally.
Yes, there were Muslim rulers who destroyed Hindu temples and gave the call of Jihad, but they were purely for political reasons. Like, Mahmud Ghazni, who gave the call of Jihad, just to exploit the services of mercenary soldiers, who would be too willing to serve under him (free) for the sake of war booty and the ‘elusive’ divine reward of 72 virgins if they died.
That’s how politics of religion worked and still works. The thousands of online sena of ‘educated’ trolls today work in the same fashion and under the same delusion (that they are serving the cause of their religion) as the mercenary soldiers of Mahmud Ghazni did, 1000 years before.
When Historians state that main objective of attacks of Mahmud Ghazni was to convert India from “Dar-ul-Harb” (land of non believers) to “Dar-ul-Islam” (land of Islam), they conveniently ignore the fact that in 17 attacks that Ghazni made in India, never even once did he have the ambition /intention of establishing an Islamic empire in India. The fact is that he was a ‘lootera’ to the core and misused religion to amass wealth and political power.
Had history been taught objectively, people would have realized that politicians today are misusing religion to amass wealth (through political power) in the same way as Ghazni did 1000 years ago, and not to establish “Hindu Rashtra”.
3. When historians conveniently omit from history, the gross atrocities committed by rulers who were Hindu, such as destruction of Buddhist and Jaina temples, and persecution of heterodox sects which emerged in 4th-5thC B.C., they have in fact ingrained in young minds the element of self righteousness, and that it is they, the majority community, who have been wronged throughout history.
Had pupils been taught that Hindu rulers have also destroyed Hindu temples, the young minds might have acknowledged the fact that it is actually power politics that matters and religion is just an excuse.
Also Read: Ashoka, the Great Emperor – Know the Real History and Facts
4. Had historians not overplayed terms such as “Jaziya” in a communal way, and stated that it was just a tax that Hindus had to pay, in place of “Zakaat” which was collected from Muslims, students might have learnt that the sole motive of the state is exaction of taxes, under various labels and not religious persecution. You cannot rule in a land by persecuting majority community.
5. Had historians been objective and ethical in stating the various factors responsible for spread of Islam in India and not just resorted to half cooked ‘spread by the sword’ theory, the acrimony between the two largest communities living in India might not have been as grim as it is today.
Had social sciences been taught to students as objectively as knowledge of sciences, then
इस देश की सूरत आज कुछ और होती