*Political Ideology and Interpretation of History*

*Ram Puniyani*



Our sub continent, which has a common past; shares its history, there are
diverse ways of looking at the same history by groups belonging to
different political ideologies. With the change of Government in Delhi, the
leading institutions are having a major policy shift, organizations like
Indian Council of Historical Research, National Council for Education,
Research and Training amongst others, as they have got heads whose
qualification is not excellence in their disciplines but their proximity to
ideology of ruling dispensation. These are the institutions which delve in
to history, education and most of the disciplines related to social
sciences. The change of the policy seems to be guided by BJP’s parent
organization, RSS whose political ideology is Hindu nationalism in contrast
to the values of Indian Constitution, the one of Indian Nationalism. To
give an indication of the same RSS Chief (Sarsanghchalak) stated (March 3,
2015) that Indian history should be saffronised. To back him up BJP leader
and ex Minister of MHRD Murli Manohar Joshi said that the call to
saffronise Indian history is necessary and the concerned Minister should
feel proud in saffronising the history books.

What is saffronisation of History books? This term was coined by the
progressive rational historians and intellectuals to criticize the move of
same Dr. Joshi when he was minister of Human Resource Development, the
ministry which also deals with education, in Vajpayee led NDA Government
(1998) and had brought serious changes in the curriculum, education and
social science-history books. The books which were introduced during his
tenure had statements like, it is because we are the children of Manu that
we are known as manushya or manav (human), scientists consider plants as
inanimate, while the Hindus consider them as animate and to have life, on
refusing to accept Islam Banda Bairagi had the heart of his son thrust down
his throat, Sati is presented as a Rajput tradition that we should be proud
of, etc. Similar distortions in medieval period were; Qutub Minar was built
by emperor Samudragupta and its real name was Vishnu Stambha. At another
level the battles for power between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, the battle
between Akbar and Maharana Pratap, Guru Govind Singh and Aurangzeb was
given religious color.



These changes came under scholarly criticism from the professional,
progressive, secular historians. They coined the term ‘Saffronisation of
education’ for this presentation of history. In the face of the criticism
the same Murali Manohar Joshi said that the changes in the history books
are not saffronisation, its mere correcting the distortions in the history
(April 2003) Now turning around due to newer political equations; he is
owning the same term, saffronisation, as a matter of pride.



It was British who introduced the Communal historiography in India. This
historiography is a way of looking at the historical phenomenon through the
lens of religion. The same history in a modified way was picked up by the
Hindu and Muslim communalists. In sum and substance, Hindu communalists,
Hindu Nationalists presented that India was a Hindu nation from times
immemorial and Muslims and Christians and Muslims are foreigners here. The
Muslim communal history began from the invasion of Sindh by Mohammad bin
Kasim bin in 8th century and claimed that Muslims were the rulers of this
land so British should hand over power to them once they leave. A version
of this prevails in Pakistan History books today.



In contrast; those identifying with secular, democratic Indian national
movement presented a view of history where religion of King was not the
main determining factor of his policies. This view was also presented by
the leader of freedom movement, Mahatma Gandhi. In his book Hind Swaraj he
writes, “The Hindus flourished under Moslem sovereigns and Moslems under
the Hindu. Each party recognized that mutual fighting was suicidal, and
that neither party would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both
parties, therefore, decided to live in peace. With the English advent
quarrels recommenced… Should we not remember that many Hindus and
Mohammedans own the same ancestors and the same blood runs through their
veins? Do people become enemies because they change their religion? Is the
God of the Mohammedan different from the God of the Hindu? Religions are
different roads converging to the same point. What does it matter that we
take different roads so long as we reach the same goal? Wherein is the
cause of quarreling?”



After getting independence, in India while the British introduced pattern
continued for some time, gradually serious historical research and rational
approach started entering the history books. Along with formation of NCERT,
the books with rational viewpoint did replace the ones’ with communal
interpretation, in schools, which were having NCERT curriculum. With the
coming to power of BJP led National Democratic Alliance from 1998, Dr.
Joshi brought in the communalization of curriculum and saffronisation of
education. With NDA’s defeat in 2004, the Congress led UPA came to power
and it gradually and to some extent, restored the spirit of scientific
temper and rational thought in education and to some extent scrapped
communal version of history in books. The communal version of history in a
way is a fiction suiting the political agenda of ‘Religious nationalism’,
whether in Pakistan or India. So Here in India a Taj Mahal becomes Tejo
Mahalay, a Shiv Temple and the freedom struggle is presented as a religious
was against Muslims, Muslim kings are blamed for destruction of temples and
spreading Islam by sword. The divisive mind set is promoted for political
goals. In books in Pakistan Muslim Kings are Heroes and Hindu kings nobody!





Apart from the official school text books as such RSS has been running a
chain of schools, Sarswati Shishu Mandirs, Ekal Vidyalayas and Vidya
Bharati, which are using the version of History. It is this version form
RSS stable schools, which they are proposing for the state run
institutions. This is what will be a very divisive move for our plural
country with immense diversity.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to