Opinion
-
News Analysis
Excising the truth
|
What do the removed portions say? Anita Joshua finds out.
|
``AS THE study of history at this stage is intended to initiate the pupil into the rigours of the discipline, it is necessary to introduce him/her to the elements of historical methodology, of how the historian works. For this he/she should be acquainted with the various kinds of sources which form the raw materials of historical studies. The pupil may be encouraged to study the sources critically...''
This is a point made by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) in its three-page rationale for the new higher secondary history syllabus. If familiarity with various historical sources is to be encouraged, then what did Prof. Satish Chandra do wrong. Unless, of course, the NCERT Director, Dr. J. S. Rajput, uses the same lexicon as that of the Union Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Mr. Pramod Mahajan, where ``rapine'' has something to do with rape, and source has a different meaning.
After all, the portions found to be objectionable in Prof. Chandra's book on Medieval India for Class XI have been picked from various sources. Be it the reference to Guru Tegh Bahadur resorting to ``plunder and rapine'' or the mention of his execution being the result of ``intrigues of some members of his family who disputed his succession'', both are not the author's viewpoints. While the former is from a Persian source, Prof. Chandra quotes from a Sikh tradition in the case of the latter.
If anything, Prof. Chandra has spoken very highly of Guru Tegh Bahadur. After presenting a couple of different sourced interpretations for the Guru's execution, the historian makes his point:``The Guru, while being a religious leader, had also begun to be a rallying point for all those fighting against injustice and oppression... for the Sikhs, the Guru gave up his life in defence of cherished principles.''
Today, the whole section on the Sikhs in the chapter on `Climax and Disintegration of the Mughal Empire-I' stands deleted; thanks to the fact that neither the NCERT nor the CBSE - both autonomous organisations - has the gumption to stand up to the diktat of the Human Resource Development Minister, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi. And, as a consequence of this one populist action, the contribution of Sikhs to that phase of Indian history has been wiped out!
This, when the whole purpose of the deletion is to inculcate a sense of pride among children in the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur. How, pray, will that be possible now when the only reference to him in the book has been struck off completely.
Even more appalling is the NCERT's ignorance about the age of the children who study this book. Welcoming the CBSE's decision, the NCERT noted that ``parents of a 11-year-old child are entitled to inculcate in the child a sense of pride...'' Evidently, the eager-to-please-Dr. Joshi NCERT forgot that Prof. Chandra's book is not for 11-year-olds, but for Class XI students.
Scroll back in time to the Vedic Age where the Class XI book of Prof. R. S. Sharma has had to reckon with a similar deletion. Gone is the section on `The Varna System'. All because there is a mention that religion influenced the formation of social classes in India in a peculiar way and Brahmanical indoctrination is identified as one of the reasons for the caste system taking root.
References to ancient Indians being beef-eaters appears to be a particular irritant with the self-styled cleansers of history textbooks. Of the view that there is no need for Class VI students to know that beef was served on special occasions in ancient India, the NCERT has deleted similar references from even Prof. Sharma's Ancient India textbook for Class XI!
``What will they do next: Take back the Bharat Ratna given to Pandurang Vaman Kane, the great Sanskrit scholar and author of the `History of the Dharmasastra', in which he has mentioned the prevalence of beef-eating among ancient Indians,'' asked a teacher on condition of anonymity.
As it is, most schools had finished teaching the portions that have been deleted. Even in schools where this is not the case, teachers see no way of avoiding discussion in the classroom - which, too, is not permissible as per the circular. ``How can discussion be banned - it goes against the tenor of social sciences and democracy.''
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Opinion
|
