People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol.
XXVI No. 42 October 27,2002 |
WE should like to draw attention to the way Sir Syed Ahmad Khan has been portrayed in the new NCERT textbooks for Class IX, titled “Contemporary India”, authored by Hari Om and others. This book on pages 26-27 gives a very objectionable account of our University’s founder. The account comes under the very tendentious heading “Emergence of the Muslim League” though Sir Syed had died in 1898 had no connection with the Muslim League (founded in 1906). The account begins by declaring that Muslims had participated in the 1857 uprising, not (like the Hindus, presumably) for the country’s freedom, but “in order to regain the ground lost and restore the Mughal empire to its pristine glory”. After this bit of insinuation, it goes on to say that Sir Syed “realised that the British rule had come to stay and its hostility to the Muslims will only help and strengthen the rising Hindu elite” – as if the guiding principle of Sir Syed’s effort was not the spread of modern education, but hostility to the Hindus.
Hari
Om then goes on to make the utterly false statement that the British so favoured
Sir Syed that they “invited him (Sir Syed) to England”, whereas the British
had nothing to do with his trip, which was made at his own instance and expense.
A
calumny is also made against the Aligarh Movement when it is stated that ‘one
of the aims of the Aligarh movement was to “make the Mussalmans of India
worthy and useful subjects of the British Crown”. Hari Om quotes these words
as if these have come from any document of the Aligarh Movement, whereas the
Aligarh Movement is only a general name for the movement based at Aligarh to
promote modern and scientific education. There could have been no declaration of
any sort made on its behalf; and it included both loyalists of British rule and
nationalists, a point which Hari Om deliberately hides.
Hari
Om’s account of Sir Syed Ahmad’s criticism of the Indian National Congress
also misrepresents his position, giving it a purely communal colour. It is clear
from Sir Syed’s Lucknow and Meerut speeches, which Hari Om mentions, that his
opposition was not on communal, but other grounds.
Nowhere
does the textbook make any reference to Sir Syed’s ardent support of the cause
of modern education and to his making no distinction between Hindus and Muslims
in the pursuit of this cause.
How
tendentious Hari Om is may be seen from his treatment of Dayanand Saraswati on
p.22. Dayanandji’s slogan “Back to the Vedas” is acclaimed as a
nationalist slogan, despite its totally religious character. Hari Om does not at
all mention that Dayanandji always affirmed full loyalty to British rule.