Director of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), D. P. Saklani unveiled the Class 8 Social Science textbook with several fundamental changes on July 17, 2025. This revised version of texts will be utilised in schools from the academic session, 2025-26. Wide-ranging changes have been made in this new edition. Media reports have singled out how existing lessons on Mughal and Muslim rulers had been replaced with details of the religious persecution and other atrocities under ‘Muslim rule’ in India. And on this pretext, the Hindutva-captive media and ‘WhatsApp university’ have started another war against Islam and the country’s Muslims. Before this move, some radical changes had been made in the textbooks of classes 6-12.

The expert who has been given the responsibility to complete this work by NCERT, under the complete control of RSS, is Michel Danino, an Indian writer of French origin. He secured Indian citizenship only in 2003. The Modi government has conferred the Padma Shri, India’s fourth-highest civilian award on him, in 2017.  He is currently the chairman of the social science curriculum of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). He is a supporter of Hindutva and has been criticised for indulging in historical negationism (denying the truths of the past).

Let us first understand which crucial developments have been omitted from the school syllabus.

Emergency of 1975

The chapter on Emergency in the Class 12 political science textbook ‘Politics in India after Independence’ has been reduced by five pages. Parts relating to the harsh impact of the Emergency on people and institutions have been deleted.  Another reference to the ban imposed on all trade union activities during the Emergency has been removed from chapter 8 (‘Social Movements’) of the class 12 sociology textbook.

Material on protests and social movements dropped

Nearly three chapters detailing protests that turned into social movements in contemporary India have been removed from political science textbooks for classes 6 to 12. A chapter on “Rise of Popular Movements” has been removed from the class 12 textbook ‘Politics in India after Independence’. The Chipko movement, the growth of the Dalit Panthers in Maharashtra in the 1970s, the agrarian struggles of the 1980s, especially those led by the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), the anti-alcohol movement of Andhra Pradesh, details on the famous Narmada Bachao Andolan [Save Narmada River Movement] opposing the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Project on the Narmada River and its tributaries in Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra and the Right to Information movement were removed in one go.

The chapter ‘Struggle for Equality’ also removed

NCERT has also removed the chapter ‘Struggle for Equality’ from the Class 7 Political Science textbook, which states how ‘Tawa Matsya Sangh’ fought for the rights of displaced forest dwellers of Satpura forests of Madhya Pradesh.

Chapter on struggles of indigenous people removed

The third chapter on mass struggles has been removed from the Class 10 political science textbook ‘Democratic Politics-II’. It dealt with indirect ways of influencing politics through pressure groups and movements. Besides the movement for democracy in Nepal and the protests against water privatization in Bolivia, South America. This chapter also covered the Narmada Bachao Andolan, the non-violent ‘Kittiko-Hachiko Movement’ (‘Kittiko-Hachiko Movement’, also known as the “Kittiko Hachiko” movement, was a non-violent protest in Karnataka, India, in 1987 which opposed eucalyptus plantations on grazing land. The movement involved people plucking eucalyptus saplings and planting alternative, useful plants instead) in Karnataka in 1987, the BAMCEF (All India Backwards SC/ST/OBC and Minorities Communities Employees’ Federation) founded by Kanshiram in 1971, and the National Alliance of People’s Movements, whose founders included Medha Patkar.

Scissors on study of social movements

The only chapter on social movements in the sociology syllabus of classes 11 and 12 has been significantly reduced. In the chapter titled ‘Social Movements’ in the class 12 textbook ‘Social Change and Development in India’ one of the several changes made is the removal of the exercise box in which students were asked to discuss the recent farmers’ protests against the three farm laws passed by Parliament.

Shredding of Indian democracy

Four chapters dealing with Democracy and the Making of Indian Democracy have been removed on the ground that similar topics are covered in Political Science textbooks of other classes. For example, a chapter titled ‘Key Elements of Democratic Government’ has been removed from the Class 6 political science book. This was the first detailed introduction to the concept of democracy in middle school and discussed some of the key elements that affect the functioning of a democratic government, including chapters like ‘Democracy and Diversity’ and ‘Challenges to Democracy’ that have been removed from the Class 10 political science textbook.

Both these chapters were first removed from the CBSE syllabus in April and have now been permanently removed from the NCERT textbook.

Jawaharlal Nehru cut short

The following comment of Nehru on Bhakra Nangal Dam has been removed from Class 12 Sociology textbook, ‘Social Change and Development in India’:

“Our engineers tell us that probably nowhere else in the world is there a dam as high as this. The work bristles with difficulties and complications. As I walked around the site I thought that these days the biggest temple and mosques and gurdwara is the place where man works for the good of mankind. Which place can be greater than this, this Bhakra Nangal, where thousands and lakhs of men have worked, have shed their blood and sweat and laid down their lives as well?”

Discussion on sedition deleted

A section describing the arbitrariness of colonial sedition law through the example of sedition and how Indian nationalists, specially, revolutionaries played a role in challenging it is no longer part of a chapter ‘Understanding Laws’ in the class 8 political science book. This deleted section also carried the following exercise for students: “State one reason why you think the Sedition Act of 1870 was arbitrary? In what ways does the Sedition Act of 1870 contradict the rule of law?”

Constitution making and creation of linguistic states left out

The chapter ‘India after Independence’, which talks about constitution making and creation of linguistic states, has been removed from the Class 8 history textbook ‘Our Pasts III’.

Description of demolition of Babri Masjid, Gujarat and Manipur violence removed

References to the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (1992), targeted killing of Muslims in the Gujarat communal violence (2002), and to the Manipur violence have been removed from Class 11 and 12 textbooks.

Pioneers of Anti-British struggle, Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan dropped

NCERT’s new Class 8 social science textbook does not mention Hyder Ali and Tipu Sultan, or the four Anglo-Mysore Wars of the 1700s, in its chapter on India’s colonial period. Remember, Tipu Sultan, known as the “Tiger of Mysore”, led a glorious military resistance to British colonialism. He was the pioneer of rocket artillery which had great success against the British. The economy of Mysore reached its peak during his reign.

He was martyred on 4 May 1799 while fighting the combined forces of British-Maratha-Nizam at the Srirangapatna front. At the time of Tipu’s martyrdom, he was wearing a heavy gold ring on which ‘Ram’ was inscribed in Devanagari script.

How much British dreaded Tipu would be clear by the letter which A. Campbell, wrote to the Court of Directors of the East India Company in 1788, “the most active powerful, ambitious Prince of Hindustan, whose troops are in high order and whose powerful antipathy to the English is beyond what the Directors are yet well aware of.” When he died there were jubilant celebrations in Britain with declaration of public holiday in Britain.

Shockingly, Danino defending the removal of Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan’s contribution to anti-colonial wars while confirming that Tipu Sultan and related events will likely remain absent in Part 2 of the series as well, stated: “If we include every war, we go back to cramming.”

The ‘Muslim’ rule not removed but toxified

The supplicant majoritarian regime-captive media and experts have been arguing that the period of rule of Muslim rulers in India has been removed, attributing this reason to the ire within the secular and progressive camp. The truth is different: Muslim rule has been related but re-configurated and now narrated with a vigorous anti-Islam and anti-Muslim rhetoric in tune with the current communal politics of RSS-BJP rulers (regime).

The history section of the new book, begins with the Delhi Sultanate and goes up to the colonial period (the British Raj), deliberating in a note on ‘Dark Periods of History’, when war, abuse, fanaticism and bloodshed prevailed. The description of ‘dark periods of history’ includes the oppressive policies of Mahmud of Ghazni and the Mughal rulers as we will know in the following.

1. Reference to Mahmud Ghazni of Afghanistan, who invaded the subcontinent and raided the Somnath temple, has been tweaked. First, the title “Sultan” has been dropped from his name. Second, the sentence “he raided the subcontinent almost every year” has been revised to “he raided the subcontinent 17 times (1000-1025 CE) with a religious motive”.
2. On Babur, the first Mughal emperor, the book notes that his autobiography points to him as being cultured and intellectually curious. “But he was also a brutal and ruthless conqueror, slaughtering entire populations of cities, enslaving women and children, and taking pride in erecting ‘towers of skulls’ made from the slaughtered people of plundered cities.”
3. Akbar’s reign is described as a blend of “brutality and tolerance”, and that during the seizure of the Chittor fort, Akbar, then 25 years old, ordered the massacre of 30,000 civilians, and the enslavement of women and children, the new textbook states. Akbar’s message is also quoted in the textbook: “We have succeeded in occupying a number of forts and towns belonging to infidels and have established Islam there. With the help of our bloodthirsty sword, we have erased signs of infidelity from their minds and have destroyed temples in those places and also all over Hindustan.”
4. On Aurangzeb, the book points out that some scholars argue that his motives were primarily political, and they give examples of his grants and assurances of protection to temples. While politics played a part in his decisions, his farmans (edicts) “make his personal religious motive clear too.” He ordered governors of provinces to demolish schools and temples, and destroyed temples at Banaras, Mathura, Somnath, and Jain temples and Sikh gurdwaras.

This detailed account of the atrocities committed by the ‘Muslim’ rulers on their Hindu subjects has been accompanied by a commentary which underlines that it is important to study the dark events objectively, without blaming anyone of the present-day people (i.e. the Muslims of the country). If we want to identify the criminals of the ‘Muslim Raj’, then the historical facts of that period, as recorded by the ‘Hindu’ sources themselves, will clearly reveal that the upper caste Hindus were fully complicit in the atrocities committed by the Muslim rulers.

Majoritarian narrative of incidents in history when privileged caste Hindus helped ‘Muslim’ rulers

No sane person can deny that Somnath Temple in Gujarat was desecrated, looted and razed by Mahmud Ghazi (Mahmud Ghaznavi) in 1026. But a fact remains buried that it was done with the active help and participation of local Hindu chieftains. The most prominent ideologue of RSS, MS Golwalkar while referring to the desecration and destruction of Somnath Temple by Mahmud Ghazi added:

“He crossed the Khyber Pass and set foot in Bharat to plunder the wealth of Somnath. He had to cross the great desert of Rajasthan. There was a time when he had no food, and no water for his army, and even for himself left to his fate, he would have perished…But no, Mahmud Ghazi made the local chieftains to believe that Saurashtra had expansionist designs against them. In their folly and pettiness, they believed him. And they joined him. When Mahmud Ghazi launched his assault on the great temple, it was the Hindu, blood of our blood, flesh of our flesh, soul of our soul-who stood in the vanguard of his army. Somnath was desecrated with the active help of the Hindus. These are facts of history.”

[RSS English organ, Organizer, January 4, 1950.]

These were not ‘Muslim’ rulers only who were defiling Hindu temples. Swami Vivekananda shared the fact that,

“The temple of Jagannath is an old Buddhistic temple. We took this and others over and re-Hinduised them. We shall have to do many things like that yet”. [The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 3, 264.]

It has been corroborated by another darling of the Hindutva camp, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee. According to him the rath yatra, an integral part of Jagganath Temple was a Buddhist ritual. Bankim wrote:

“It is a fact…that the images of Jagannath, Balaram, and Subhadra, which now figure in the Rath, are near copies of the representations of Buddha, Dharmma, and Sangha, and appear to have been modelled upon them.”

[Chatterjee, Bankim Chandra, ‘On the origin of Hindu festivals’ in Essays & Letters, Rupa, Delhi, 2010, pp. 8-9.]

It was not an isolated takeover. Swami Dayanand Saraswati who is regarded as a Prophet of Hindutva and revered by RSS while dealing with the contribution of Shankaracharya (8th century) in his tome, Satyarth Prakash wrote:

“For ten years he toured all over the country, refuted Jainism and advocated the Vedic religion. All the broken images that are now-a-days dug out of the earth were broken in the time of Shankar, whilst those that are found whole here and there under the ground had been buried by the Jainis for fear of their being broken.” [Sarswati, Dayanand, Satyarth Praksh, chapter xi, p. 347.]

According to the Buddhist narrative of ancient Indian history the last of Maurya dynasty’s Buddhist king (Ashoka being one), Brihadratha was assassinated by Pushyamitra Shunga, a Brahmin in 184 BCE thus ending the rule of a renowned Buddhist dynasty and establishing the rule of Shunga dynasty. DN Jha an authority on ancient Indian history referred to Divyavadana, a Buddhist Sanskrit work from the early centuries which described how Buddhist and Jain religious places were destroyed by Pushyamitra Shunga, a great persecutor of Buddhists.

“He is said to have marched out with a large army, destroying stupas, burning monasteries and killing monks as far as Sakala, now known as Sialkot, where he announced a prize of one hundred dinars for every head of a Shramana (opposed to Vedas).”

Jha also presented evidence from the grammarian Patanjali, a contemporary of the Shungas, who famously stated in his Mahabhashya that Brahmins and Shramanas were eternal enemies, like the snake and the mongoose.[1]

Did Hindus join persecution of Sikhs by Mughals?

In the Hindutva narrative the persecution of Sikh Gurus and their followers by Mughal rulers is used to spread hatred against present day Indian Muslims. The Mughal rulers especially Aurangzeb’s armies committed the most heinous and unspeakable crimes against Sikhs. Was the conflict really Muslims versus Sikhs? The contemporary Sikh records reject such an interpretation. According to a Sikh site during the last and the most brutal siege of Anandpur Sahib in 1704, “The Muslims and the Hindu hill rajas completely surrounded the city and cut it off from outside supplies.” While trying to escape the Mughal invaders,

“The younger sons of Guru Gobind Singh, Baba Zorawar Singh age 9 and Baba Fateh Singh age 7, were separated from the group in the confusion. They walked through the rugged jungle with their holy grandmother, Mata Gujri ji (mother of Guru Gobind Singh) until they came to small village where they took shelter. An old servant of the Guru’s household, Gangu, heard they were there and came to Mataji. With sweet words he requested that they go with him to his village. He expressed care and concern, but his heart was dark with betrayal. Cold, wet and alone, Mata Gujri gratefully went with Gangu to his house. For a few gold coins, Gangu betrayed their whereabouts to the Moghul army. At dawn, a loud banging came on the door, and the soldiers of the evil governor Wazir Khan came to escort the holy family to Sarhind. As they travelled through the city, people thronged to see them pass offering words of encouragement. They shouted curses at the Brahmin and were shocked at the depravity of the Moghul governor”. [2]

Maratha Rule glorified overlooking what it did to Hindus

The class 8 social science book now has a separate chapter on the Marathas; it refers to the Anglo-Maratha wars between 1775 and 1818 and states that “the British took India from the Marathas more than from the Mughals or any other power”. Marathas in general are seen as having “contributed substantially to India’s cultural developments.”

Let us compare these claims with the horrendous experience of the contemporary Hindus. Sir Jadunath Sarkar (1870-1958), a renowned historian, held no brief for Islam or Muslim rulers in India. In fact, he is regarded as a true ‘Bhartiye’ historian by RSS and a truthful narrator of the Hindu history during the Mughal rule. However, his description of the Maratha invasion of Bengal in 1742, too, makes it clear that this army of ‘Hindu nation’ cared least about honour and property of Hindus of Bengal. According to Sarkar, “the roving Maratha bands committed wanton destruction and unspeakable outrage”.

[Jadunath Sarkar (ed.), The History of Bengal-Volume II Muslim Period 1200 A.D.–1757 A.D. (Delhi: BR Publishing, 2003), (first edition 1948), 457.]

Sarkar, in his monumental work on the history of Bengal, reproduced eyewitness accounts of the sufferings of Bengali Hindus at the hands of Marathas. According to one such eyewitness, Gangaram,

“The Marathas snatched away gold and silver, rejecting everything else. Of some people they cut off the hands, of some the nose and ear; some they killed outright. They dragged away the beautiful women and freed them only after raping them”.

[Jadunath Sarkar (ed.), The History of Bengal-Volume II Muslim Period 1200 A.D.–1757 A.D. (Delhi: BR Publishing, 2003), (first edition 1948), 457.]

Another eyewitness, Vaneshwar Vidyalankar, the court Pandit of the Maharaja of Bardwan, narrated the horrifying tales of atrocities committed by the Marathas against Hindus in the following words:

“Shahu Raja’s troops are niggard of pity, slayers of pregnant women and infants, of Brahmans and the poor, fierce of spirit, expert in robbing the property of everyone and committing every kind of sinful act.” [Ibid., 458.]

Babur’s atrocitiesNCERT does not tell the truth that Babur captured northern India by defeating and killing the Muslim Ibrahim Lodhi. It is also not mentioned that the chief commander of the Hindu king Rana Sanga who challenged Mughal army led by Babur was Hasan Mewati who was martyred while fighting Babur’s army in the Battle of Khanwa [near Bharatpur] on March 15, 1527. Atrocities of Aurangzeb

It cannot be argued that Aurangzeb [1618-1707] did commit heinous crimes against his Hindustani subjects. It is important, however, to remember that his cruelty was not confined to non-Muslims.
His own father (Mughal emperor Shah Jahan), brothers (Dara Shikoh, Murad Bakhsh and Shah Shuja), the Shia community, Muslims who did not follow his brand of Islam and the Muslim ruling dynasties in the eastern, central and western parts of India suffered his terrible cruelty and repression. They were destroyed. The word barbaric would be too mild a word to describe his treatment of the Sikh Gurus, their families and followers.

It was Aurangzeb who murdered the famous Sufi saint, Sarmad, in the premises of Delhi’s Jama Masjid [there is a mausoleum on his grave at the eastern gate of the Jama Masjid where the stairs begin, which is still revered by many people]. It is also true that there were numerous cases when Hindus and their religious places were violently targeted during the autocratic rule of Aurangzeb. He crushed the rebellions of the ‘Satnamis’ in Gujarat.

However, there are also contemporary records of his patronage of Hindu and Jain religious sites. Two surviving examples are the magnificent Gauri Shankar Temple, a short distance from the Lahori-Gate of the Red Fort, which was built during Shah Jahan’s reign which continued to function during Aurangzeb’s reign and the famous Jain Lal Mandir right opposite the Red Fort. [Trushke, Audrey, Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth, Penguin, Gurgaon, 2017, pp. 99-106.] Both these temples continue to function even today. It is important to remember that limiting all the crimes of Aurangzeb only to the suppression of Hindus would be tantamount to trivializing his grave crimes against humanity.

Mughal rule evolved and sustained by the support of the Hindu privileged castes

How naive is NCERT (or it is under the total influence of RSS) that it is unaware of the fact that Aurangzeb or Mughal ‘Islamic’ rule used Hindu upper castes in droves to establish and run their empire which was inhabited predominately by Hindus. How deep and strong this unity can be gauged from the fact that after Akbar, no Mughal emperor was born to a Muslim mother. The Hindu upper castes showed immense loyalty to the ‘Muslim’ rulers and served them well with both their brains and strength.

Aurobindo Ghosh, who played a major role in providing a Hindu dimension to Indian nationalism, acknowledged that Mughal rule survived due to the fact that the Mughal emperors gave Hindus “positions of power and responsibility, they used their brains and brawn to preserve their kingdoms”. [Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 3, Publication Division, Government of India, Delhi, 1992, p. 162.]

The renowned historian Tara Chand, relying on primary source material of the medieval period, concluded that from the end of the 16th century to the middle of the 19th century, “it can be reasonably concluded that the entire Punjab, except western Punjab, in whole of India, the ownership of land had come into the hands of the Hindus”, most of whom were Rajputs. [Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 1, Publication Division, Government of India, Delhi, 1961, p. 124.]

What do the contemporary official records show?

Maasir-ul-Umara [Biographies of Commanders] A biographical dictionary of officials the Mughal Empire from 1556 to 1780 [from Akbar to Shah Alam] in Persian language is the most authentic record of high-ranking officials employed by the Mughal rulers. This work was compiled by Shahnawaz Khan and his son Abdul Hai between 1741 and 1780. The details contained in it were based on the official records of the Mughal rulers. According to this compilation, during this period the Mughal rulers had about 100 Hindus (out of 365) were appointed to the high-ranking positions of Mughal empire, most of whom were from “Rajput Rajputana, Central-India, Bundelkhand, Maharashtra”. As far as numbers are concerned, Brahmins followed Rajputs in handling the Mughal administration.

[Khan, Shah Nawaz, Abdul Hai, Maasir al-Umara [translated by H Beveridge as Mathir-ul-Umra], volumes 1 & 2, Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1979.]

Interestingly, the Kashi Nagari Pracharini Sabha, founded in 1893 which was “committed to the establishment of Hindi as the official language”, published part of this book in Hindi which contained ‘Biographies of Hindu Chieftains of the Mughal Court’ in 1931. [व्रज रत्न दास (अनुवाद), माआसिरुल–उमरा, काशी नागरी प्रचारिणी सभा, काशी, 1931]

Aurangzeb’s Hindu Generals & Advisors

Aurangzeb never faced Shivaji on the battlefield. It was his general, Jai Singh I (1611-1667), a Rajput ruler of Amer (Rajasthan), who was sent to subjugate Shivaji (1603-1680). Jai Singh II (1681-1743), (nephew of Jai Singh I) was another prominent Rajput general of the Mughal army who served Aurangzeb loyally against Shivaji. He was given the title of ‘Sawai’ by Aurangzeb in 1699. He was awarded the title of [one fourth time superior to his contemporaries] and thus he came to be known as Maharaja Sawai Jai Singh. He was also given the title of Mirza Raja [a Persian title for a royal prince] by Aurangzeb. Other titles given to him by other Mughal rulers were ‘Sarmad-i-Rajah-i-Hind’ [Eternal Ruler of India], ‘Raja Rajeshwar’ [Lord of Kings] and ‘Shri Shantanu Ji’ [Benevolent King]. These titles are even today displayed by his descendants today.

Akbar vs. Maharana Pratap

According to the prevalent Hindutva narrative, Pratap Singh I, popularly known as Maharana Pratap (1540-1597), fought for Hindus and Hindu nation against the Mughal emperor Akbar who wanted to subjugate the Hindus of India under Islamic rule. Interestingly, Akbar never faced the Maharana in any battle; it was Akbar’s most trusted Rajput military commander, Man Singh I (1550–1614), also his wife’s real brother, who fought against the Maharana on behalf of the Akbar.

The most important battle of Haldighati (June 18, 1576) was fought between the army led by Maharana and Mughal army led by Man Singh I. He was one of the Navratnas (favourite courtiers of Akbar). Akbar called him his Farzand (son), and he ruled several provinces of Akbar’s empire.

It also must be noted that chief of artillery of the army of Maharana Pratap was Hakim Khan Suri. He played a great role in confronting the Mughal army led by Man Singh in the Battle of Haldighati. Hakim Khan Suri fought alongside Maharana Pratap and was killed in the same battle while defending Maharana.

A Kayastha Prime Minister of Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb

Contemporary documents carry first-hand accounts of Raja Raghunath Bahadur, a Kayastha, who served as the Diwan Aala (Prime Minister) of both Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb. According to a biography written by one of his descendants, Raja Maharaj Lal,

“Raja Raghunath Bahadur was not oblivious to the interests of his co-castes [Kayasthas], having risen to the highest post of Dewan Aala (Prime Minister). Raja appointed each of them to positions of honour and emoluments according to their individual merits, while many of them were granted honours and valuable estates for their services. Not a single Kayastha remained unemployed or in needy circumstances.”

[Lal, Lala Maharaj, Short Account of the Life and Family of Rai Jeewan Lal Bahadur Late Honrary Magistrate Delhi, With Extracts from His Diary Relating to the Times of Mutiny 1857, 1902.]

This account reveals that in the Sultanate of Aurangzeb, who was a ‘fanatic Muslim’ and an unbridled tyrant, the Kayastha prime minister was free to patronize people of his caste, all of whom were Hindus. Aurangzeb was so fond of this Hindu Prime Minister that after his death he instructई one of his Wazirs (ministers) Asad Khan in a letter to follow the ‘saintly guidance’ of Raja Raghunath. [Trushke, Audrey, pp. 74-75.]

Investigating only the “Muslim period’ (500 years) in a 5000-year-old Indian civilization

Linking the crimes committed by Aurangzeb or other ‘Muslim’ rulers in pre-modern India to their religion is going to have serious consequences even for the ‘Hindu’ history as told by the RSS. For instance, take Ravana, the king of Lanka, who as per the ‘Hindu’ legend, committed unspeakable crimes against Sita, her husband Lord Rama and their companions during their 14-year long exile [exiled by Hindus only]. This Ravana, according to the same legend, was a learned Brahmin and one of the greatest worshippers of Lord Shiva.

Instances of Violence when in the earlier periods, when Hindus inhabited India

Mahabharata

The epic Mahabharata is not the story of a fierce war between Hindus and Muslims but between two ‘Hindu’ armies (Pandavas and Kauravas, both Kshatriyas). In this War, according to the ‘Hindu’ account, 120 crore people (all Hindus) were killed. Draupadi, the joint wife of the Pandavas, was disrobed by the Kauravas (all Hindus).

If the crimes of Ravana, Kauravas, Jai Singh I and II etc. are linked to their religion like Aurangzeb and other ‘Muslim’ rulers, then the country be represented as one that is perennially on the war path. If revenge then needs to be taken on the present co-religionists of the rulers/criminals of the past, then it must begin from the beginning of Indian civilization; the turn of Indian Muslims will come much later!

‘Muslims’ ruled India for centuries, but Muslim population remained a minority

Another crucial fact which is consciously kept under wrap is that despite more than five hundred hundreds of effective ‘Muslim’ rule which according to Hindutva historians was nothing but a project of annihilating Hindus or forcibly converting the latter to Islam, India remained a nation with an absolute Hindu majority. The British rulers held first census in 1871-72. It was the time when even ceremonial ‘Muslim’ rule was over. According to the Census report:

“The population of British India is, in round numbers, divided into 140½ millions [sic] of Hindus (including Sikhs), or 73½ per cent., 40¾ millions of Mahomedans, or 21½ per cent. And 9¼ millions of others, or barely 5 per cent., including under this title Buddhists and Jains, Christians, Jews, Parsees, Brahmoes…”

[Memorandum on the Census of British India of 1871-72: Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty London, George Edward Eyre and William Spottiswoode, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office 1875, 16.]

These figures make it clear that persecution and cleansing of Hindus was not even a secondary project of the ‘Muslim’ rule. If it had been so Hindus would have disappeared from India. At the end of ‘Muslim’ rule Hindus were 73.5%. India seems to be the only country in world history where despite ‘Muslim’ rule of more than half of a millennium the populace did not convert to the religion of the rulers. Hindu High Castes remained in control of the national wealth during the ‘Muslim’ rule and continue to be in control whereas common Muslims remained paupers during the ‘Muslim’ rule and continue to be so!

In the latest NCERT rewrite spree on Muslim period, a mysterious note has been added which generously states that the dark events i.e., Muslim period should be studied impartially without blaming any present-day people (i.e. Muslims of the country). If we really want to identify the criminals of ‘Muslim Raj’ then it is very important to also settle the account with the privileged caste Hindus of the country and not Indian Muslims. There are historical reasons behind the huge amount of wealth that the upper castes of the country have today.

They Hindu privileged castes did not bear enmity towards either Muslim or Christian rulers but rather served them with utmost loyalty; they even developed bread-daughter [roti-beti] relationship with the Muslim rulers. It is not that the upper Caste Hindus did not fight these cruel rulers, but nobody of their lineage survived. The tragedy of the country is that children of those who betrayed common Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains of this country, served most loyally under both the ‘Muslim Raj’ and the British.

[1] https://caravanmagazine.in/reviews-and-essays/dn-jha-destruction-buddhist-sites

[2] https://www.sikhdharma.org/4-sons-of-guru-gobind-singh/

Related:

Now NCERT removes passages about caste and religious discrimination from social science books

Are citizenship and secularism ‘disposable’ subjects for Indian students?

The post Rewriting NCERT school textbooks: ‘Muslim Raj’ is a mere excuse, the project is to conceal historical facts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

I am nervous in speaking before this panel of knowledge elites who are far ahead of me in mediatized performance. In fact, I was hardly needed within this panel, given there is a galaxy of experts present.

These days, communicating within (and among) the like-minded audience is hardly a challenge and it doesn’t serve the desired purpose as much as it should.  The panellists have already spoken a lot on the theme of the symposium. At stake are the words, “evidence”, “proof”, “facts” (subut, sakshya, pramaan). The incumbent regime is doing everything in its power to create a common sense against “evidence” (rationality). Not just in the discipline of history but in every sphere of our daily lives. Not just in India; elsewhere too. Non-state actors, with the backing of state power and wilfully failed criminal-justice system, are deciding what we eat, what not to and what kind of edibles can be stored in our kitchens and refrigerators. These factors impinge on whether we can live or can be killed with impunity.

We are here to reflect upon the National Education Policy 2020. Its basis, as admitted by the Indian government is National Curriculum Framework for School Education 2023. The three year of school education during the Grades 6 to 8, according to them are very critical. They do admit that content and pedagogy both are crucial. I looked into the textbooks meant for Grade 6 and for Grade 7. The title is Exploring Society, India and Beyond. The regime claims that these textbooks have an emphasis: minimizing the text by focusing on core concepts. “Focusing on big ideas”, is their emphasis in the “Letter to the Student”, appended at the beginning of the books; and multi-disciplinary approach is an important stated concern. Fundamental Rights and Duties are excerpted from the Constitution, and printed with embellishment. All these are high sounding claims, apparently. But not so, as we get into the details by proceeding further into the book.

A few years ago, we also had “Learning Outcomes based Curriculum Framework (LOCF): BA History Undergraduate Programme, 2021”. In an essay in the journal, Social Scientist, Irfan Habib has written extensively. The prose is endearingly satirical, a trait which the eminent historian employs in his public speaking and less in writing and within the classroom. I would strongly recommend that all of you read the essay. Such a Framework from the regime envisages political encroachment upon the curricula-framing and through this the shrinking autonomy of the universities.

Maulana Azad’s role as education minister (1946-58), along with Nehru and Radhakrishnan, in the autonomy of the UGC was foundational (1953-56). He championed the creation of an independent statutory body to manage and fund higher education, a move that was essential for the institutional autonomy of universities and for the development of a standardized and high-quality higher education system in India. Not only this, Maulana Azad served as the Chairman of the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE), a vital body for advising the central and state governments on educational matters and in framing school curricula. He presided over multiple meetings of the board, including those held in 1948, 1949, and 1950. This position gave him a direct platform to shape and influence educational reforms and policies at a national level.

Maulana Azad was quite conscious of the fact that the Medieval historical past (Muslim rulers) will be weaponized in certain ways by both, Hindu and Muslim communal forces. He therefore instructed (1949) ‘the historians of AMU to conduct research on that period by accessing original sources in Oriental languages.’ While resisting colonialism, his own perception of the Mughal past was distinctive. For instance, he looked upon Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi’s resistance (otherwise quite a conservative figure) against Akbar as an instance of why Muslim subjects too rise in resistance against the British colonial state (See Muzaffar Alam, “Maulana Azad and his memory of the Islamic past: a study of his early writings”, JRAS, Cambridge. 33, 4, 2023, pp 901-916)

For the diminishing autonomy of the universities in recent decades, politics is responsible as also the misuse and abuse of autonomy by the universities and the academia themselves, over a period of time. Recently, the Vice Chancellor (VC) of a prestigious university recently got a show cause notice on the flimsiest of grounds and the notice was not issued by the Visitor. More on that on another occasion!

The specific theme around which we have gathered here is something we are agitated about given that the incumbent regime is selective about facts, besides distorting the facts of history and more than that, which is, not less important, manipulating historical facts in most insidious ways. Manufacturing falsehood, parading these as history, and thereby poisoning the minds of children, of ordinary people in general. That is our concern here. There is a systematic attack on reason. People should not have minds, apply them, should not have or develop any critical faculty. They should not be thinking like citizens with powers of critical thinking, rather, they should function as mere subjects, praja, reáaya, before rulers. This appears to be the dominant political wisdom today.

We also need to keep in mind the fact that the NCERT textbooks are written more for the purpose of teaching material to the teachers. This is the purpose forgotten a long while ago.

Just four days ago, my teacher, Prof Farhat Hasan, along with Prof. Neeladri Bhattacharya, in their interview with Vrinda Gopinath (The Wire.In, July 31, 2025), have articulated all the important concerns pertaining to the issue. Ruchika has been doing it consistently in so many ways with effective communication. I hardly need to repeat these here. I would therefore seek your permission to raise some other issues which may not be getting adequate attention in terms of diagnosing the trouble. Just for the sake of informing the less informed, non-specialist audience here, allow me to do a quick recap, before embarking on the issues I wish to raise here:

In the latest version of NCERT textbooks, we have:

• Demonisation of Mughal rulers including Akbar (a feat achieved by Muslim reactionaries too); and the controversy around Aurangzeb-Shivaji. Through both of these, we can clearly identify the ways in which Hindu and Muslim Right Wing treat history.
• Discussing historical periods and rulers within the binaries of ‘Glorious’ and ‘Dark’ periods and rulers defined as ‘Heroes’ and ‘Villains’, in terms of their personal faith. This irrational method overlooks overall state policies and political contexts and values of the era, and thereby creates an atmosphere through which co-religionists of these past rulers are made answerable for certain deeds. Taken to extremes, this can mean ‘punishing them for the previous wrongdoers.’
• The authors/editors of the NCERT textbooks of the 1970s and then again in 2005-06 had reputed professional academic historians this is not the case anymore;
• Earlier, each chronological period had judiciously distributed adequate space, across the evolving grades from VI to XII;
• All regions had spaces in terms of history-making, in the earlier textbooks, yet there were allegations of selective emphasis;
• Gender, Caste, Environment, Technology and Socio-economic changes, Growth of Science in history, sports, literature, sartorial culture, etc., were the issues which remained less addressed; with the evolution of a historical understanding, these issues were attempted in the NCET textbooks of 2005-06. Yet, right wing allegations persisted.
• Allegations of the Right wing were and are (about earlier books), temple ‘destructions’ during the time when Muslim rulers ruled were not emphasized in these texts. Making this argument they pushed for deletion of similar acts by Hindu rulers. Narratives built to create a communally divisive atmosphere. As if today’s ordinary Muslims are answerable for the past conduct of Muslim rulers, and today’s Hindus aren’t answerable for the similar acts of the Hindu rulers in the past.
• Anglo-Maratha Wars are okay to be taught, the Anglo-Mysore wars must to be omitted
• Ironically, while right wing forces might apparently talk of nativism laced with the rhetoric of being anti-West, at the same time their historical narratives derive much from the colonially divisive projects of historical representation;   Dr Ruchika Sharma is doing a lot to speak and write on these.

History has a political goal, has been a tool of ruling class, across the globe. It was so, always. This reminds me of Paul Freire’s 1968 book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed. He identifies two objectives of pedagogy: a tool for domination, and a tool for liberation. Here there are two models viz., “Banking Model”, in which the students are treated as passive recipients who in turn become unthinking, “submissively obedient” and status-quoist.[1] This de-humanises both the teachers and the students. In this, the oppressed turn into a new batch oppressors. Another model of pedagogy, Friere says, is: “Problem-Posing Model” wherein the teachers and students are co-educators to each other, it is dialogic and interactive.

In this context, one is also reminded of a recent book, Hilary Falb Kalisman, Teachers as State-builders[2]. This book talks of teaching which turns students into a force of resistance, state-subverters, disruptors, challengers to the status quo, and thereby creating thinking citizens who will build stronger society and state, rather than collaborators of the regime.  That is how, Kalisman says, colonial societies emerged to resist the state and attain freedom.

School textbooks are often used to both craft what the nation is or must be and to “teach” future citizens how they are now bound to and by a common historical narrative. Therefore, it is not surprising that India and Pakistan (and later Bangladesh) have put concerted efforts into crafting propaganda-like historical narrations about what their nations stood for.

Such historical narrations ‘droned on, ponderously, sonorously, and repetitively’ in citizenship projects about how the nation came to be formed and what the nation-state did for people’s benefit. Joya Chatterji (in her Shadows at Noon, p. 145) writes: ‘It was not so much that this publicity was executed with brilliance. It was not. It was merely the case that it was repeated ad nauseam, and that everydayness made the message natural’.

Not that history has not been used as a tool in earlier times! But then it was, as it should be, used as a tool of emancipation. Emancipation of the colonised, enslaved people. To inject self-confidence among the rising nation, the nation in making. By the word, nation, I mean people, not merely territory.  Jawaharlal Nehru’s Discovery and Glimpses were written for those noble purposes. Tara Chand’s books, the books written on the history of 1857 in 1907-09, in 1957, in 2007, etc., by the scholar-activist nationalists were pursuits in those directions. The NCERT textbooks, the books written for popular readings and published by the NBT were all exercises in those noble desirable purposes and directions.

Modern rational, secular democracies need such pursuits immeasurably. Praja ko Nagrik mein badalna hai, that is our biggest challenge today. It is a battle between “communalisation” and “secularization”. Please do note the difference. I am not using the words, “communalism” and “secularism”. I am using its variants, the process, not the mere nouns.

Once we read, Yasmin Khan’s 2011 essay (Modern Asian Studies), “Performing Peace: Gandhi’s Assassination as a Critical Moment in the Consolidation of the Nehruvian State”, we get to know, beyond the stated motive of the author, that the Nehru-led state was making efforts which were, in turn, using it in a certain way; the way for the marginalizing the forces who liquidated Gandhi’s body and life, if not his mind and ideas and ideology and praxis and methodologies.  Nehru strategically managed the public mourning, funeral, and distribution of Gandhi’s ashes to assert state power and legitimise Congress leadership during the turbulent post-Partition period (1947–1950). The state-organised funeral in Delhi, contrasted with widespread, vernacular mourning rituals across India, bridged the gap between the state and the people, reinforcing Nehruvian secularism. Public grief, amplified by events like the Ardh Kumbh Mela, transformed Gandhi into a saintly figure, fostering communal harmony and countering Hindu nationalist sentiments. Yasmin Khan emphasizes that these rituals were not merely ceremonial but politically transformative, solidifying the Congress Party’s role in shaping a unified, secular Indian state.

Nehru was very clear about the problem of communalism. He knew it more clearly than anybody else that in colonial era Muslim communal separatism was stronger because of the colonial state; during 1938-47, competitive communalisms of the two largest religious communities became greater menace because of the colonial state. After 1947, more particularly, after January 30, 1948, Hindu communalism was greater threat. Patel realised it only after January 30, though he didn’t survive for long after that to help Nehru in a larger way. He died in December 1950; not in 1960 (our Home Minister, Mr Shah should allow me to correct him)!

I was referring to the processes of communalisation. These forces remained there, not exactly subterranean, in the early years of independence. The majoritarian forces were apparently and arguably not in a hurry to be state-centric. They were working more on cultural fronts, and in the spheres of education, with the “Catch-them-Young” approach. This focus was there among both Hindu and Muslim communal forces. Both, were waiting for the right moment to capture state power for a full scale implementation of their communalisation programmes. In Pakistan, this project was hardly ever in resistance, as the very basis of the creation of Pakistan was communal. Krishna Kumar and at least in a column, Arvind N Das had written extensively on this. Persons, some previously with the prestigious, St Stephen’s, [I H Qureshi (1903-1981) and also the Gen Zia’s regime] did much to push Pakistan rightward. Ali Usman Qasmi’s (essay in Modern Asian Studies, 2018), “A Master Narrative for the History of Pakistan: Tracing the origins of an ideological agenda”, explains this phenomenon at length.

Gen Zia’s reign (1977-1988), more aptly depicted in Hanif’s novel, A Case of Exploding Mangoes[3], coincided with the Saudi-funded project of the Islamisation of Knowledge (IoK) scheme. A range of scholars in different parts of the world started promoting Islamisation of Knowledge (known as ‘IoK’) in the late 1970s. The first World Conference on Education in Makkah (1977) marked a decisive step in the formulation of this project on an international platform. [Among the best-known scholars advocating this notion were Palestinian–American scholar Ismail al-Faruqi and Malaysian philosopher Syed Naqib al-Attas. For radicalization under Gen Zia’s regime, see, Virinder and Waqas Bhatt’s ‘If I Speak, They Will Kill Me, to Remain Silent Is to Die’: Poetry of resistance in General Zia’s Pakistan (1977–88), Modern Asian Studies, 53, 4, 2019. Also see my blog, “Namo’s India a parody of Zia’s oppressive regime in Pakistan?”, SabrangIndia. In, February 17, 2020].

“Sub-continental Majoritarianisms”, to use Papiya Ghosh’s expression, and global politics of the Ummah created a fear among Hindus, especially after the Khilafat mobilisations during the national movement. After Partition too, Hindu Majoritarianism derived fodder from such political pursuits of the Ummah. (Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was against the pan-Islamic, extraterritorial, Ummah; he was for a Qaum confined within national boundary). This phenomenon (Muslim communalism) feeding majority communalism has been afoot since the 1970s and 1980s. This is not a marginal factor. One communalism feeds another, is what Nehru had said, and Bipan Chandra later elaborated upon it.

India and its own Muslim right wing organizations were not averse to or unconnected with the abovementioned schemes promoting the Muslim right wing. Please do have a look into Chapter 6 of Laurence Gautier’s latest book on post-1947 AMU and JMI, Between Nation and Community, Syed Anwar Ali, a Jamaat-e-Islami affiliated teacher in the AMU and his book, Hindustan Mein Islam, and I H Quraishi’s book, The Muslim Community of the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent, 610-1947, which give us a clear idea of Muslim Right Wing in our sub-continent, pre and post-1947.

All right wing forces have globalised networks. Secular resistance too has to ensure globalised networks of solidarity. No study or commentary in isolation will really help us understand the communal forces. (Communalisation of the textbooks is just a part of that politics); and thus, a less informed understanding and flawed or partisan diagnosis will not help us create an effective solidarity. Going soft on the Muslim right wing and hard against the Hindu right wing has proved a counterproductive strategy all these years.

Khoo gar-e- Hamd se thorha sa gila bhi sun le

Barring one or two lesser known pamphlets published by the Indian Left I have hardly come across any comprehensive criticism against the India’s Muslim right wing pursuits in these domains. We do understand that post-1947, the Muslim Right Wing couldn’t be as dangerous as the Hindu Right Wing. It was Nehru’s understanding of communalism and it was his desired magnanimity. That does not, however, really mean that such a lesser danger would not attract attention and will not be resisted. I am not compartmentalising the resistances we ought to offer.

Given the contemporary challenges, I strongly feel that Muslim intellectuals (if they really exist) of India need to speak out more on those aspects. India’s Liberals as also Leftists have reasons to agree with Nehru’s understanding on the colonial and post-Independence communalisms in India (Nehru understood that Muslim communal separatism was more dangerous only till 1947, under the colonial prodding; post-1947 India, Hindu communalism is more dangerous). To this, Late Prof Imtiaz Ahmad had an opinion: this differential understanding doesn’t really mean that while fighting the two communalisms you will discriminate between the two. They have reasons not to speak as much on Muslim right wing. But that cannot be a choice for the Muslim intellectuals. The more they avoid exposing India’s Muslim right wing, the more they provide weapons to the Hindu right and the more they weaken the moral authority of India’s Secularists.

I am only reminding this audience of the fact that minority rights discourses from Muslim leaders have remained weaker during our national movement (the Muslim League shifted this discourse to a direction in which Muslim minority was to be treated to be a nation of ex-rulers), and after Independence too, communal-identitarian concerns were given priority. Rather than strengthening the secularisation processes of India, Muslim intellectuals have remained more active in safeguarding regressive and patriarchal Personal Laws, and less at strengthening the secular forces of India. The religious and “secular” Muslim leadership has remained more identitarian, less secularistic. That has all along done a great disservice to the overall processes of secularisation, only to help majoritarian forces.

Fast forward to 1977 and after: Resurgence of competitive communalisms in the 1980s

Riding on alliance-politics, majoritarian forces in India eventually succeeded, more menacingly with the turn of this century/millennium. They had never really given up. Competitive majoritarianism remained a force to reckon with across the sub-continent. Whenever they formed governments in alliance/coalition in New Delhi, majoritarian parties preferred to the portfolios education, culture, information and broadcasting. Other non-Congress or anti-Congress regional forces hardly pitched for such portfolios.

Unlike majoritarian parties, secular forces, most of who have been state-centric; were dependent upon state resources, subsidy concessions and spaces to run their secularisation projects. Of course, the Left forces existed in industrial trade unions, on the university campuses, students and youth movements, and in the peasant movements, and through certain effected cultural organisations in both theatre, literature and art, too. A changing global economy and the disintegration of the USSR has weakened Left forces in recent decades.

One of the reasons why in recent years more and more Hindus have embraced Neo-Hindutva is the real question to be addressed, here. To my understanding, this question is fundamental because the attack on rationality and ever-increasing receptivity of the falsehood and of the distorted history is linked with this issue. This leads us to another question, how did we deal with the Muslim communalism, in the colonial era as well as in post-independence era?

What proportion of the Muslim literati looked at India’s ancient past with desirable and reasonable pride? Why did Shibli feel more agitated to write in defence of Aurangzeb? Why did he write biographies only of Muslims – non-Indian, Arab-Muslims at that? What proportion of Muslim elites are self-critical? To what extent do they look critically upon the ideas, institutions and history-making individuals of Muslims? What made a section of Muslim elites run a narrative of venerating Aurangzeb as Zinda Pir, and adding the suffix of rahmatullah alaih too?

An honest answer to those questions may help us find one of the missing answers for the first question I raised here as to why more and more Hindus have been embracing majoritarianism in recent decades.

The vilification and/or “villainisation” of Medieval Muslim rulers by Hindu majoritarian and reactionary forces, by stating half-truths, or putting out facts in a distorted manners, is just one problem! What is the obverse side of this problem? Why do a section of Muslims of today feel so very compelled to defend and justify and eulogize only a certain kind of Muslim rulers?  Omission of the story of valiant resistance and confrontation of British colonialism by Tipu Sultan is an obvious problem. The latest NCERT edition has omitted Tipu. A valid resistance to this politics does require that certain facts about Hyder-Tipu rule should not be ignored or omitted by secularists too. The Moplah-Nair “communal” conflict has an agrarian history of land ownership as to whose ownership preceded whose, before and after Hyder-Tipu rule? D N Dhanagre (Past and Present, OUP, vol. 74, 1977) has written about this. Quite a secular historian. Yet, that fact, uncomfortable for Muslims and Liberals and Left, has been obviously overlooked. Ignoring these aspects of history not just makes us intellectually dishonest, it also thereby weakens the legitimacy of our resistance. And that is how we self-restrict building a solidarity for our cause. We have to rethink and introspect.

I recall having read a long interview of Intezar Husain, with Umar Memon (July 1974), published in the early 1970s. (English rendering carried in the Journal of South Asian Literature, 1983). Intezar reminded us Muslims that, in comparison with the Hindus, our attitudes vary. This variation hasn’t been addressed as adequately as required. That has contributed to communalisation and pushing the country rightward.

Our discriminatory and dishonest treatment of both communalisms might be one of the factors why Hindutva has been gaining greater acceptance among growing number of Hindus?

I would therefore seek your permission to make you a bit uncomfortable at least in the last segment of this talk, if not intermittently throughout the talk.

Intezar argued that Shibli Nomani “continually romanticised our history, but there were some other aspects of our history which he didn’t describe at all”. Nirad Chaudhuri’s Continent of Circe, “dealt with the history of India and analysed the Hindu community in an uncompromising and even brutal manner”. “The Muslim community has taken great pride in the fact that the philosophy of history was born among Muslims. But the fact is that these Muslims do not face their history squarely, but merely picked out its good features and then celebrated these as the entire whole of our history. Nirad Chaudhuri’s approach is completely the opposite since he has no wish to “celebrate” the history of the nation of which he is one individual. We see him striving to reach its essence and to present that essence without regard to how his own people would react to it”, argued Intezar Husain.

Now, my question is this: why when such issues were raised in the 1970s, did they remain unaddressed (or inadequately) addressed as before? Addressing these questions may help us understand, at least partly, why more and more Hindus have begun to hate Muslims incrementally.

I have already referred to Syed Anwar Ali’s Urdu book Hindustan Mein Islam. This could be a case study to measure the Muslim right wing’s way of looking at post-Independent Indian History (and their political intent too) Anwar was a faculty at AMU.

As the Hindu right wing has engaged more in vilifying Muslim rulers in general, they appear to be less interested with the Muslim right wing’s knowledge production in India. The day they take this up, things would become even more difficult in terms of building solidarity and resistance against Neo-Hindutva.

Leaving this at that, let us come around the issue of Partition. The subject has been taught through the prism of causes, not on consequences. Why? Because, causation is motivated with the idea of blaming someone and absolving others. In this case, since the League asked for Pakistan and got it, it has to share greater blame. Nonetheless, in such a restricted or selective teaching of the causes behind Partition, Muslims and Muslim League are hardly distinguished from each other, even in among some of liberal circles.

Why is it that stories and narratives of Muslim resistance to Partition remain under-explored, under-prescribed and under-popularised? Why do a good number of educated Muslims of India still rejoice in a historical literature which absolves Jinnah and his League? I leave this question for certain sections of the Muslim educated elite of India: to undertake an honest self-introspection on this count too.

Following two works of Muslim writers are very significant in the genre of anti-League Partition literature.

Syed Tufail Ahmad Manglori’s 1946 book, Musalmanon Ka Raushan Mustaqbil, got translated into English in 1994 only. Similar literature, such as Hifzur Rahman Seohaarvi’s 1945 book, Tehreek-e-Pakistan Par Ek Nazar, remain least known. Does this mean that in academic circles as well as in the popular domain, anti-League Muslims remain lesser known? How many of the Muslim literati really talk about such figures and such writing? I have spent over three decades as student and as teacher in AMU. Few years back, when I was addressing an AMU gathering, on Tufail Manglori (Manglauri), the founder of the City School and shared that he was an ace wicket keeper of the MAO College Cricket team, the information was received by a large audience with surprise. Very few knew about this. A good number of Muslims do remember Seohaarvi as an ex-MP but his anti-League book, Tehreek-e-Pakistan is hardly known even among the literati or the chatterati.

Mushir-ul-Haq (1933-1990) has demonstrated it very well in his 1972 essay, “Secularism? No; Secular State? Well- Yes”. In this essay Haq highlighted a contradiction in the approach of some Muslim leaders. He observed that while they might publicly criticise “secularism” as a concept, they would simultaneously defend the “secular state” and the constitutional protections it afforded them, such as minority rights and the freedom to manage their own religious and educational institutions. He pointed out that this stance could appear to be a form of double standards.

With this, the point I am trying to emphasise here is: in order to strengthen the fight against Neo- Hindutva and in order to strengthen the hands of the likes of Yogendra Yadavas, Apoorvanands, Harsh Manders, Ravish Kumars, Ruchika Sharmas, we ought to resolve that critiquing and exposing the Muslim right wing should not be the business best ignored by thought-leaders, opinion-writers, academics, public intellectuals bearing Muslim names. They must not shy away from this urgent task. They must not keep arguing to the tune that ‘this is not the right time for burdening Muslims of India’ with such a task. For too long we have made such a fallacious and counterproductive argument. This is one of the many factors having contributed to the rise of Neo-Hindutva. The projects of communalising the textbooks, the state and the society have been gaining strength with the way we have been arguing, “this is not the right time to critique, expose and resist the Muslim conservatives and right wing ……’

Do we really even realise the depth of the threat?

I am very sorry to say the answer to this question is not in the affirmative. I am saying this with the unique experience of working with and living on a Muslim majority campus. This is a pessimism coming from me who in his own self-assessment is not someone who gives up on anything easily.

Before I leave, I must clarify what Neo Hindutva is:

The term “Neo-Hindutva” is a relatively recent academic and journalistic concept used to describe the evolution and new expressions of Hindu nationalism in contemporary India, popularised by scholars such as Edward Anderson and Arkotong Longkumer in a 2018 special issue of the journal Contemporary South Asia and an earlier 2015 article, which is, “idiosyncratic expressions of Hindu nationalism which operate outside of the institutional and ideological framework of the Sangh Parivar”, quite distinct from  the modernisation of Hinduism by figures like Swami Vivekananda in the late 19th century.

Neo-Hindutva is defined as a more diffused, mainstreamed, and adaptable version of traditional Hindutva. Unlike the original ideology formulated by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 1923, which was explicitly a political theory of Hindu nationhood, Neo-Hindutva is characterised by its ability to permeate new spaces and take on various forms.

Key characteristics that distinguish Neo-Hindutva from its traditional counterpart include:

• Mainstreaming and Normalisation: It is no longer confined to the institutional and ideological boundaries of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates (the Sangh Parivar). Instead, it has become a normalised, everyday discourse that is seen in popular culture, social media, and even in spaces like yoga and spiritual movements.
• Focus on Development and Neoliberalism: Unlike traditional Hindutva, which was often viewed as separate from economic policy, Neo-Hindutva has been linked to a specific brand of neo-liberalism. It often frames economic progress and material prosperity as a result of and a prerequisite for Hindu assertion. This ties national pride and economic growth together.
• “Hard” vs. “Soft” Expressions: Scholars like Anderson categorize Neo-Hindutva into two types: Hard Neo-Hindutva: This includes groups and movements that are openly connected to Hindu nationalism but operate outside the direct control of the Sangh Parivar, often with a more militant or vigilante approach. Soft Neo-Hindutva: This is a more subtle and concealed form, often avoiding explicit links to majoritarian politics. It operates through think tanks, international organisations, and cultural groups that promote a Hindu identity and narrative under the guise of cultural preservation, charity, or community building.
• Appeal to new constituencies: Neo-Hindutva has expanded its appeal beyond the traditional upper-caste support base by incorporating and co-opting the aspirations of lower-caste groups and Adivasi (tribal) communities, often by offering them a space within a broader, unified Hindu identity.

Thank you for the patience in listening to my discomfiting words!

(The author presented this view on August 4, 2025 at a symposium held at the Constitution Club of India, New Delhi, topic Distortions in the Syllabus of History Books; the presentation sent to us by the author has been suitably edited for publication)

[1] Brazilian educator, Paulo Freire written in Portuguese between 1967 and 1968.

[2] Assistant Professor of History and Endowed Professor of Israel/Palestine   in the Program for Jewish Studies at the University of Colorado Boulder

[3]  2008 comic novel by the Pakistani writer Mohammed Hanif. It is based on the 1988 aircraft crash that killed Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, the sixth president of Pakistan.

The post Distortions in the syllabus of history books, an uncomfortable perspective appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post The Culture of Impunity at SAU, the University That Expelled Me appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This was not just a death—it was a public indictment of the system, an institutional murder carried out by neglect, indifference, and patriarchal complicity. Her body burned because her voice was buried.

Six months of harassment, two suicide attempts, and deafening silence

The accused, Dr. Samir Kumar Sahu, was head of the Education Department. Over the past six months, he allegedly made sexual advances, then threatened to fail the student in exams and ruin her academic record when she refused, as reported by The Hindu. The student, an active member of Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), submitted formal complaints not only to her college’s Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) but also to Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi, Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, and the National Commission for Women (NCW).

But her pleas went unanswered. When she asked the principal, Dilip Ghose, for help, he allegedly mocked her and threatened rustication if she pursued her complaint. According to her family, the student had earlier tried to end her life twice due to the relentless harassment.

On July 1, she submitted a final complaint, warning she was under mental stress and could be forced to take an “extreme step.” On July 9, the college ICC gave a clean chit to Sahu, further isolating her. That same week, police claimed they were still waiting on the college’s response to her complaint before acting, according to the report of Hindustan Times.

The Act of Fire: A final protest no one could ignore

On the morning of July 13, the young woman staged a dharna outside the principal’s chamber. Moments after leaving his office, she poured petrol on herself and set herself ablaze, as caught on CCTV footage. Fellow students rushed to save her, several suffering injuries in the process.

She was rushed to Balasore District Headquarters Hospital and then shifted to AIIMS Bhubaneswar, where a team of 8 specialist doctors took charge of her care. Despite intensive efforts, including mechanical ventilation and renal therapy. She died on the night of July 14, reported by ANI.

In her final hours, President Droupadi Murmu and Odisha Governor Hari Babu Kambhampati visited her at AIIMS, and assured the family of every possible support. But to many watching, their presence seemed symbolic—arriving only after the flames had done their damage.

Arrests after Death: Too late, too convenient

Public outrage following her death forced the state’s hand. The Higher Education Department of Odisha suspended both Sahu and Ghose. Police arrested them for abetment of suicide, criminal intimidation, and for failing to act on sexual harassment complaints, according to Times of India.

But the student’s father, himself a clerk at a local college, said the system had already failed his daughter. As per TOI, he alleged that Sahu constantly harassed her over attendance, despite her having valid health and family emergencies. When she asked for leniency, he demanded sexual favours in return. No internal or police authority took decisive action, even after she detailed her distress.

A State Awash in Sexual Violence: Multiple incidents of rapes, gang rapes in the past one month

Her case is the most tragic, but not the only one. Odisha is now gripped by a disturbing wave of sexual violence, particularly targeting young women, minors, and vulnerable groups.in the month of June, at least seven major gang rape or assault cases were reported:

• June 15: A 20-year-old college student allegedly gang-raped by 10 men on Gopalpur Beach.
• June 16: A 17-year-old girl from Keonjhar allegedly gang-raped and murdered.
• June 17: A disabled woman allegedly sexually assaulted while bathing at a village pond.
• June 22: Two women, including a 22-year-old from Delhi, allegedly molested and attacked in Jajpur.
• June 23: A minor girl allegedly raped by a fake homeopathy doctor in Berhampur, aided by his assistant and an Anganwadi worker.
• June 24: A woman allegedly gang-raped at a deserted dhaba in Mayurbhanj.
• June 28: A Class 7 girl allegedly raped by her relative in Ganjam.

As reported by The Hindu, A white paper on crime, released by the Odisha Home Department in March 2025, recorded 3,054 rape cases in 2024—an 8% increase from 2023.

Political Firestorm: Sympathy, outrage, and damage control

The student’s death has catalysed rare bipartisan outrage. The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) announced an All-Odisha Students’ Strike. Former CM Naveen Patnaik called it a “collapse of institutional protection”. The Congress dispatched a 5-member all-women fact-finding team, and the NCW demanded a full inquiry. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) issued notices to the Odisha government on both the self-immolation and the Gopalpur gang rape, as per the report of India Today.

Chief Minister Mohan Majhi visited AIIMS and promised “strict action” and “justice through fast-track courts.” But his government is already under fire for delayed police action, non-functioning ICCs, and an alarming breakdown of law and order, especially in educational institutions.

Conclusion: She burned because they wouldn’t listen

This was not a tragedy of impulse. It was the culmination of a system-wide failure—from the ICC to the police, from the classroom to the state assembly. The student wrote. She warned. She protested. And when no one believed her, she turned her own body into a burning letter of last resort.

If this death is allowed to fade into the next news cycle, it won’t just be an injustice to her. It will be a signal to every other survivor in Odisha, and across India, that silence is still safer than speaking out.

Her name may not be remembered, but the image of a young woman setting herself on fire in front of her college principal’s door, after being denied every possible avenue of justice, must haunt our collective conscience until every ICC function, every complaint is heard, and no girl has to burn just to be believed.

Related:

Beed to Delhi: Lawyer beaten in Maharashtra, judge threatened in Delhi—what the path for justice means for women practioners in today’s India

When Courts Fail Survivors: How patriarchy shapes justice in sexual offence against women cases

From Protectors to Perpetrators? Police assaulted women, Children, Christian priests in Odisha: Fact-finding report

Surviving Communal Wrath: Women who have defied the silence, demanded accountability from the state

The post Institutional Murder in Odisha: A Student sets herself on fire to be heard appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry attributes this freeze to the lack of clearance from the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA), a high-level body chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. A July 1 government communication cited by the newspaper stated: “Provisional award letters to the remaining candidates (from serial number 41 to 106) in the selected list may be issued in due course, subject to availability of funds.”

Established in 1954–55, the NOS scheme offers financial assistance to students from historically disadvantaged and oppressed communities, including Scheduled Castes (SC), De-notified and Nomadic Tribes (DNTs), semi-nomadic tribes, landless agricultural labourers, and traditional artisan families, with an annual household income cap of Rs 8 lakh. It enables them to pursue postgraduate and doctoral studies abroad.

In previous years, all selected candidates received provisional letters without delay. This year, however, the Ministry has adopted what it describes as a “phased approach” that hinges on funding availability—a move that has left many scholars in limbo just weeks before international admissions deadlines.

Speaking to The Hindustan Times, an unnamed ministry official pointed squarely to bureaucratic red tape at the highest levels: “It is an issue with the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs not approving the money allocated to these scholarship schemes. We have the money, but we also need the green signal from above to give it out.”

Government Says no funds, but spends over ₹500 crore on PM’s Foreign Trips

The claim of “lack of funds” for the National Overseas Scholarship stands in stark contrast to the significant public expenditure on Prime Minister Modi’s own overseas travel. According to data provided by the Ministry of External Affairs in response to a parliamentary question raised by MP Fauzia Khan, over ₹517 crore was spent on PM Modi’s foreign visits between 2014 and 2022 alone. This includes costs for chartered flights, accommodation, logistics, and security. The expenditure on a single foreign trip often exceeds the annual budget for the NOS scheme. The contrast has drawn serious concern among student groups, academics, and civil society organisations, who view this disparity as a reflection of the state’s shifting priorities—away from inclusive education and toward high-profile statecraft.

Broader pattern of scholarship disruptions

This isn’t an isolated instance. A series of scholarship schemes targeting marginalized students have faced similar bottlenecks, delays, and arbitrary exclusions in recent months—raising questions about systemic withdrawal of support for higher education among Dalit, minority, and backward-class students.

Take the Maulana Azad National Fellowship (MANF), for instance. This fellowship, awarded by the Ministry of Minority Affairs to research scholars from six notified minority communities (Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, and Parsi), has left over 1,400 PhD candidates without stipends for months. According to a Wire investigation published in June 2025, payments to most scholars have been stalled since December 2024. Some have not received their stipends even prior to that period. (Detailed report may be read here and here.)

Similarly, the National Fellowship for Scheduled Castes witnessed chaos during its June 2024 cycle. Initially, the National Testing Agency (NTA) released a list of 865 selected candidates in March 2025. However, just a month later, a revised list slashed the number to 805—removing 487 previously selected scholars without explanation or transparency, triggering anguish and confusion across research institutions.

Political Pushback and Declining Numbers

On June 10, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and INC leader, Rahul Gandhi, wrote to Prime Minister Modi, raising alarm over what he described as the “deplorable” condition of hostels, malfunctioning portals, and erratic disbursement of scholarships across the country. He particularly highlighted the case of Bihar, where the state’s scholarship portal allegedly remained defunct for three consecutive academic years, effectively denying all aid to eligible students during 2021–22.

As per the report of The Wire, Gandhi noted a steep decline in the number of scholarship recipients: “The number of Dalit students receiving scholarships fell by nearly half, from 1.36 lakh in FY23 to just 69,000 in FY24.” He also criticised the quantum of scholarship disbursals, stating that many students complain the amounts are “insultingly low” and insufficient to cover basic expenses.

A larger crisis of educational access?

The government’s repeated invocation of “fund constraints” and committee approvals, despite existing budgetary allocations, has sparked outrage among students and education rights advocates, who say that the current delays are not mere administrative lapses but indicative of a broader policy shift away from targeted educational equity. For many first-generation learners from SC, OBC, EBC, and minority backgrounds, these scholarships represent their only pathway to higher education, especially abroad or at the doctoral level. As things stand, the fate of 66 National Overseas Scholarship awardees remains suspended in uncertainty, and with it, their long-cherished hopes of studying abroad.

Related:

Union scraps Maulana Azad Scholarships for Research Scholars from Minority Communities

Why has the Union govt pulled the plug on minority education schemes?

AISHE survey shows enrolment of Muslim students in higher studies falls significantly compared to other communities

Maulana Azad Foundation terminated by Centre as government cuts down on minority schemes

The post Funds Withheld, Futures on Hold: Dalit, OBC, Minority students face scholarship crisis amidst delays and cuts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While writing my previous blog on how and why Narendra Modi went out of his way to promote English when he was Gujarat chief minister — despite opposition from people in the Sangh Parivar — I came across an interesting write-up by Aakar Patel, a well-known name among journalists and civil society circles.

Titled “How Gujarat ignores the English language”, with a subheading “Exploring clichés about Gujarat’s English and education system”, the piece was published in the online edition of the Hindustan Times’ business daily, Mint. It is now 12 years old — one reason why I decided to review what Aakar had written.

While quickly going through the article, I found Aakar — who served as the head of Amnesty International India between 2015 and 2019, and currently chairs its board — was grossly mistaken in stating that the Congress in Gujarat “has supported introduction of English earlier but the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) reject this.”

Traditional Indian spices

As my two previous pieces on this site suggest (click here and here), poor English in Gujarat is actually a Congress legacy — one that sections of the Sangh Parivar wanted to continue. Modi, however, made efforts to reverse this by crafting policies and programmes supporting the teaching of the language.

That said, much of what Aakar wrote in his article — published online in Mint on October 18, 2013 — still holds true. Written after attending a function at a school in Surat where he had studied 25 years earlier, Aakar states he “was struck” to find school teachers speaking “an embarrassingly-broken English, sprinkled with errors and without felicity.”

I don’t know how much teachers’ knowledge of English has changed since then, but Aakar’s quotation from the Gujarat education department website suggests that Modi’s efforts to promote English seem to have failed — at least at the official level. The web address quoted by Aakar may have changed, but the gibberish English written on it remains stuck in time.

Indeed, the two long quotes from the website that Aakar reproduced in 2013 remain unchanged. They appear verbatim today as they did then — serving, as he called them, “an evidence on display” of the poverty of English in a department meant to support Modi’s language promotion policies through such grand programmes as SCOPE, or Society for Creation of Opportunities through Proficiency in English.

Let me now reproduce the two long quotes from the Gujarat State Education Department website which Aakar copied in 2013 to “explain” how the department puts together its textbooks — and which remain as incoherent today as they were back then.

The first appears under the “Overview” section (screenshot here) of Gujarat textbooks. It states (quoted verbatim, without correcting grammar):

“Establishment

“Gujarat state Textbook Mandal was established in AD 1969 on 21st October. Since 38 year mandals main target. High quality textbooks are published and to Gujarat students they are easily available at reasonable prices.

Through Mandal Std. 1-12 Gujarati Medium textbooks are published. Thereafter in Hindi, English, Marathi, Sindhi, Urdu, Sanskrit and Tamil Language also text books are published.

Board Committees

Mandals whole management is done properly; it decided objectives are fulfilled for that Board Committee is formed as below.

(1) General Board (2) Director Board (3) Working committee (4) Educational committee (5) Production committee (6) Research committee.

Above mentioned all committee’s administration works properly regarding that advise suggestions are given.

Aakar Patel

 

Mandal distribution related works

Printed textbooks are distributed in whole Gujarat at Government level working organizations through them with district distributor textbook are sold in retail for that work distributors are hired. Retailers registration is done in mandal. In Ahmedabad also Ahmedabad has its own selling centre. (Sale Depot, Godown no. 9 below Asarva Bridge, Ahmedabad – 380016, Ph. 22133920) is there. At any institute or personal level to any student from this sale centre textbook can be availed at retailing std. from outside Gujarat through money order or bank draft also textbooks can be obtained.

Mandals research related work

Textbook mandal by publishing textbook is not satisfied. Textbooks quality improves continuously for that research related work is also done. From primary teacher to university professors knowledgeable persons are joined in evaluation programme and other educational programme. Textbooks writers, advisers, translators etc. for them work of finding genius is done.

Mandal’s work in new sector

Basic subject’s textbook – AD 1999 to Std. 11-12, basic subject 26 textbooks publishing being done Mandal for general exam additional subjects through textbook relevant sectors students are provided basic literature. Due to this in village and Kurshi sector also Mandal human research development important work could give own contribution.”

The second is what the department calls a “Disclaimer” (screenshot here):

“Gujarat Government Education Department related information is easily available to people from one place only with that aim this website is developed. Regarding this matter if you have any opinion then you are requested to contact us. To keep this site latest and the mistake that come our consideration to correct those mistakes all efforts will be done. In this site document information created by people and private organizations is there. The information available for outside, on its exactness, co ordination latest or completion we have no control or we can give any promise, this matter has to be kept in mind.

The information of this web site is for the benefit of general public and from it any legal right or responsibility is not created. For over sight or any mistake of typing this department is not responsible.

If any information is not true or some corrections are needed in it, if this is known then the steps to solve it opinions can be given. This web sites documents/samples (PDF file) soft copy and hard copy thus from both they are taken. While conversion certain documents formatting may change that can happen for conversion raised mistakes efforts are done of correcting it. In spite of that now also there can be any mistake in it. If regarding this matter you have any questions then original documents respective copies have to be brought or you are requested to contact us. Moreover for linked sites policy or method we are not responsible.”

Established in 2007–2008, the site has had a whopping 19,816,644 visitors. Yet it hasn’t been updated since 2014 — the year Modi left Gujarat to become the country’s Prime Minister. On Google, interestingly, the site is labelled as “Not secure or Dangerous,” with its identity marked as “not verified” (screenshot here).

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Whither SCOPE? Twelve years on, Gujarat’s official English remains frozen in time appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Division Bench of Justices M.S. Karnik and N.R. Borkar passed the stay order in a batch of petitions filed by several minority educational institutions, including prominent South Mumbai colleges like St. Xavier’s, Jai Hind, KC, and HR College, as well as institutions from Solapur. The Maharashtra Association of Minority Educational Institutions (MAMEI) also joined the petitioners in challenging the State’s move. The petitions contested a clause introduced through a Government Resolution (GR) dated May 6, 2025, issued by the School Education Department.

Clause 11 of the May 6 GR lies at the heart of the controversy. It permits unfilled seats under the minority quota to be surrendered for allotment through the centralised admission process, making them subject to applicable social and parallel reservations. The State government contended that this mechanism was devised to ensure optimal utilisation of seats and claimed it was introduced in response to requests made by the institutions themselves.

Historically, minority colleges in Maharashtra have followed a well-established formula: 50% of seats reserved for the respective minority community, 5% for the management quota, and the remaining 45% kept open and unreserved. However, for the academic year 2025–26, the centralized FYJC admission portal began reflecting the application of SC/ST/OBC reservations on this 45% open category, prompting the current legal challenge.

Arguments for the petitioner: Senior Advocate Milind Sathe, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the GR violates constitutional protections granted to minority institutions under Articles 15(5) and 30 of the Constitution. Article 15(5) specifically carves out an exception for minority educational institutions from the scope of affirmative action policies, including caste-based reservations, while Article 30 protects their right to establish and administer institutions without State interference. Sathe emphasised that even unfilled minority quota seats must revert to open category admissions, and not be diverted to socially reserved categories.

Arguments for the defence: The Government Pleader Neha Bhide submitted that the clause did not infringe on the autonomy or rights of minority institutions. She argued that once minority seats were voluntarily surrendered to the centralized pool, applying social reservations to those seats was a legitimate policy tool aimed at promoting social equity. “Social reservation is the obligation of the State,” she contended.

Order of the court: the Court found substance in the petitioners’ arguments and held that an earlier judgment of the Bombay High Court—which had quashed a similar attempt by Mumbai University to enforce social reservations in minority institutions—was directly applicable in this case. The Bench observed, as per the report in BarandBench “Prima facie, we find that there is substance in the submissions advanced by the petitioners for the grant of interim relief.”

Consequently, the Court directed that, for the purpose of FYJC admissions, the mandate of SC/ST/OBC reservation shall not be enforced in any seats of minority educational institutions. The State government has been directed to file its reply within four weeks. The matter is slated for the next hearing on August 6, 2025.

Related:

Bowing to outrage, Delhi University V-C says that Manusmriti removed from curriculum, won’t teach in future

Bombay High Court orders immediate release of 18-year-old detained for father’s citizenship status

Mumbai Walks for Peace | Citizens Unite Against Hate

The post Bombay High Court stays SC/ST/OBC reservations in minority-run junior colleges for FYJC admissions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“We will not teach any part of Manusmriti in any form in the University of Delhi. This direction has been issued even earlier by the vice-chancellor’s office, and departments should adhere to it. The department should not have put it down in the first place following these directions,” said Singh, reported the Times of India and the Indian Express. Days earlier, the objective of the course stated that “ancient Indian society, in terms of whole and its parts, has been depicted in the texts compiled in Sanskrit known as Dharmashastra.”

Just before this announcement on X (formerly twitter), the introduction of Manusmriti was widely criticised for extoling and reinforcing social, economic and gender inequalities, had prompted in some sections of faculty members in the varsity to raise concern over the move.

University of Delhi will not teach Manusmriti text in any course of the University. ‘Dharamshastra Studies’, the DSC of the Sanskrit Department, where Manusmriti is mentioned as a “recommended reading” stands deleted. @narendramodi @PMOIndia @EduMinofIndia @dpradhanbjp

— University of Delhi (@UnivofDelhi) June 12, 2025

Interestingly, other Hindu religious texts such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and Puranas have also been included as part of the course. The paper has been introduced as a core course in the current academic session and carries four credits. It is open to undergraduate students with working knowledge of Sanskrit.

Texts such as Apastamba Dharmasutra, Boudhayana Dharmasutra, Boudhayana Dharmasutra, Vashistha Dharmasutra, Manusmriti, Yajnavalkya Smriti, Narada Smriti, and the Kautilya Arthashastra have been included as primary readings.

“The text has been removed from the Sanskrit department’s ‘Dharamshastra Studies’. In the future also, whenever it comes to our notice that the text has been suggested for studying, the administration will remove it,” V-C Singh told the Hindustan Times.

DU removes Manusmriti from Sanskrit course

New Delhi : On the day TOI reported that Delhi University’s Sanskrit department had included Manusmriti in the core curriculum of its ‘Dharamshastra Studies’ course, the university announced its removal on social media.
The official DU tweet stated: “University of Delhi will not teach Manusmriti text in any course of the university. ‘Dharamshastra Studies’, the DSC of the Sanskrit Department, where Manusmriti is mentioned as a ‘recommended reading’ stands deleted.” The post tagged several govt dignitaries. The inclusion of Manusmriti had sparked widespread criticism. TNN

This retraction by the university just two days after the announcement of a “new course” has led to conclusions that it was obviously widespread protests that led to the decision. On June 12, the Times of India (“Manusmriti, caste system & marriage benefits to be part of DU curriculum”) had reported how students in Delhi University will now be taught how the varna or caste system organises society, how marriage helps build a “civilised” social order, and how morals regulate individual behaviour. These lessons were to form the core of a new Sanskrit course titled Dharmashastra Studies, which has Manusmriti as a primary text.

The newspaper also said that “Manusmriti, whose proposal for inclusion in the law and history honours syllabus was earlier held back by the administration amid backlash, has made a comeback, this time as essential reading in this discipline-specific course. Alongside it, other Hindu religious texts that had drawn similar objections, such as Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Puranas, have also been included in this course.”

The paper, introduced as a core course under discipline in the current academic session, carries four credits and is open to undergraduate students with working knowledge of Sanskrit. Discipline Specific Core refers to courses within a student’s chosen field of study that are mandatory for their programme.

Related:

BHU students granted bail 17 days after Manusmriti protest arrests

13 BHU students arrested and interrogated by ATS over allegation of burning Manusmriti

The post Bowing to outrage, Delhi University V-C says that Manusmriti removed from curriculum, won’t teach in future appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Most children from poor and marginalised families study in these government-aided schools. In fact, a large number of school-going children from families living in the worsening socio-economic situation are not entering the field of education.

The point is that education for the poor has reached rock bottom. What will be the consequences of this state of affairs?

The state government’s apathetic attitude toward education has created an atmosphere of fear. Not only the general public and guardians, but also officials in state and Union ministries discussed the education scenario in West Bengal at the end of April 2025. Both sides reportedly expressed “deep” concern over the dwindling number of students at the primary and upper primary levels.

The Basis for ‘Deep’ Concern

The number of mid-day meals that students partake is being considered a criterion at the government level. The decline in the number of students receiving mid-day-meals is a picture of decline among students in government-sponsored primary and upper primary schools. Students of both these levels receive mid-day meals.

In addition, parents seem reluctant to admit their children to government schools. Although there are exceptions, but this is broadly a state phenomenon, several school teachers this writer spoke to, said. Why?

During the last Left Front regime in Bengal from 2006-2011, about 50,000 teachers and non-teaching staff were recruited through specific examination (District Primary School Councils took the exam for primary teachers, and four regional School Service Commissions arranged for high and higher secondary teachers and non-teaching staff). A large portion of these recruitments were of primary school teachers.

“ The district primary school councils used to recruit teachers through examinations within a specific period of time”, Jyansankar Mitra, former Chairman of Bankura District Primary School Council, told this writer.

“The West Bengal School Service Commission (WBSSC) was constituted in November 1997 under the West Bengal School Service Commission Act. The Act was enacted on April 1, 1997, and came into effect on the same day. The Commission is responsible for recruiting teaching and non-teaching staff in government- aided schools in West Bengal.  Since then, teachers have been recruited to high and higher secondary schools through examination almost every year” said Professor Biswanath Koyal, first Chairman of Western Zone of WBSSC, whose jurisdiction was Bankura, Purulia, undivided Pashchim Medinipur, and Purbo Medinipur.

According to the Right to Education Act 2009, the Ideal student-teacher ratio should be 30: 1. In 2008, this ratio was 35: 1

Biman Patra, district secretary of All Bengal Primary Teacher Association, Bankura district committee, the largest primary teachers’ organisation of Bengal and Panab Mahato, his counterpart in Purulia, said due to the severe shortage of teachers, the current ratio had risen to 70:1.

After the Trinamool Congress came to power in 2011, the government recruited primary teachers in 2014 and 2016.  There are allegations of widespread corruption in recruitment of those who were appointed in 2017 after the 2016 exams. The matter is sub judice in the Calcutta High Court.

As of now, the jobs of over 32,000 primary teachers are hanging in uncertainty. Significantly, On April 3, the Supreme Court, having reached the conclusion that there was multiple corruption in the recruitment of teachers and non-teaching staff in high and higher secondary schools through WBSSC in 2016, cancelled the entire panel. As a result, 25,752 teachers and non-teaching staff lost their jobs.

There are similar allegations in the primary recruitment sector. In fact, many schools do not have enough teachers against the requirement. On the other side, a large portion of those who are in teaching positions are uncertain about the continuity of their jobs.

“Overall, it can be said that there has been an institutional crisis in the education sector in the state. This is having a devastating impact on students, teachers and parents in the area”, Panab Hazra, a librarian at Sidhu-Kanhu University of Purulia and Subikash Choudhury, former head of the department of economics, Bankura Christian College, told this writer.

“Despite financial difficulty, I have admitted my son to a private school, because I do not know when the government schools will close. The teachers are not adequate. I do not know if those who are  there, will continue”, said Mainuddin Mandal, a bread hawker in Vhikurdihi village of Bankura district. He hawks bread brough from Chandigarh in Punjab.

His wife, Rehena Bibi, said “We are struggling to run our family only for our children’s future. We have to somehow survive. We spend Rs 3,000 a month (in a private school) for my child in Class 4.” She said many parents were opting for this instead of government schools for the future of their children.

In Bagmundi area of Purulia district, this writer met a migrant worker, Ramesh Sardar. When asked, he said, “What will happen if my son completes his schooling? Will he get a job? Is there any job here? Several educated youths are sitting idle, counting their days. They are highly frustrated.”

He said he had admitted his son, Bachhu, in a high school. He studied up to Class 7. “There is only one teacher, how can this teacher manage four classes? What will students learn? Nothing. It is better to learn some manual labour skill from an adolescent age and find work in other states. At least, he will be able to eat and survive, and look after the family in the near future”.

A few days ago, some male and female agricultural labourers, along with their school- going children from Bankura, Purulia and Jhargram districts, were seen waiting at the Bankura bus stand under the scorching sun for buses to return home after harvesting boro paddy from various villages in Hooghly and East and West Bardhaman districts.

“There is no work in the area, matikatar kaj (MGNREGA work) has been closed for four years, and panchayats do not respond regarding our work. We have to survive somehow, so we go wherever we find work. Who do we leave our sons and daughters with? So, we take them along,” Urmila Lohar from Tilaboni village in Purulia, said.

When asked, all of them said that “education of our children are no longer on our minds. We have to survive first, then study.”

“This painful picture is common among jobless poor and marginalised families across West Bengal”, said Amiya Patra, leader of the Khetmajur Union and Sagar Badyakar, assistant secretary of the union’s Bengal unit.

Teachers Trying Hard to Bring Children to School

During the Left Front regime, there was a Village Education Committee (VEC) in every area. That committee consisted of an elected representative from the local panchayat/municipality, a member of the Opposition party, ICDS (Integrated Child Development Scheme) workers, an education expert of the area and teachers. The committee would discuss the ongoing situation of education in the area and take necessary measures.

“After the Trinamool Congress came to power, that VEC was dissolved. There is no discussion on education issues of the area even in the education standing committee at the block level. Only one meeting is held a year, that too related to school annual sports,” said Patra.

Rupak Mondal, district secretary of ABPTA, Jhargram district, along with several male and female teachers from Bankura, Purulia and Jhargram, confirmed that the two years of school closure during the Covid pandemic was still having a major impact. In families, where children did not attend school after it re-opened in 2022, the younger brothers and sisters have been following suit.  Many of them have left government schools and have enrolled in private ones. That trend is continuing.

It is a fact there is severe shortage of teachers as well as of officials in the education department, who are responsible to monitor the condition of schools. In this situation, several teachers have been visiting the homes of villagers and are trying to bring their children back to school.

“We go to different houses in the village and look for expectant mothers. We tell them in advance that when the child is born, he/she should be admitted to our government school. We observed that if a child takes admission in a private school his/her brother and sister will follow that path. But the fact is that in many families, the youth are not getting married because they don’t have jobs. As a result, the number of child births is decreasing” said Amit Goswami, headmaster of Kenjakura Primary school. Bankura.

“There is reluctance among parents to admit their children to government schools. The shortage of teachers is a big reason. Child birth is also decreasing in remote areas. We have asked the government to think deeply about this issue and take proper needful measures”, said Tuhin Banerjee, a primary teacher in Dubraji village of Bankura and district leader of Trinamool’s Shikhsha cell.

The District Information System of Education (DISE), which records all information regarding a school, according to the RTE Act, regarding meeting of specific criteria or if an educational institute is not given the DISE code number. During the Left Front regime, private schools did not get that code. Now it is being given to private schools in large numbers. As a result, the number of private schools is increasing.

Despite struggling to support their families, many low-income people are sending their kids to private schools, which has turned into a status symbol, said several teachers and guardians. Many parents also complained that the syllabus of government schools was not “good” and “up to date”. Also, there are fewer teachers in government schools.

On the other hand, private schools offer opportunities to study many subjects, including computers. Several parents feel this is one the key reasons for low enrolment in government schools.

Significantly, many government school teachers also are admitting their children to private schools. This is also having an impact on the people’s mind. As a result, students from financially backward families study in private schools till the primary level, but when they enter high school, they face problems in adapting to the environment. Not all families are able to afford the high cost of private education. Hence, many are forced to drop out midway.

Situation in Upper Primary Schools

Upper primary schools were built during the Left Front regime considering the geographical location of the area so that children do not have to go to high schools located far away to study from Class 5. They could study in the local area up to Class 8. After reaching Class 9, the boys and girls could travel to a distant high school.

“The Madhyamik Shiksha Kendra (MSK) that are built for grades five to eight are provided with adequate teachers”, said Fatik Goswami, former headmaster of Radhamadhab Madhyamik Shiksha Kendra of Kumidya village in Bankura. After TMC came to power, new teachers were not appointed in upper primary schools. As a result, the number of students kept decreasing.

Six MSKs have already been closed in Ranibandh of Bankura district. On January 7 this year, the Bankura district administration issued an order for shutdown of seven more MSKs. This includes Kumidya Radhamadhab MSK School.

“Had the government appointed adequate teachers in this school, students would have continued their education”, lamented Mrityunjoy Banerjee, headmaster of the school. He and a  teacher, Ramsankar Patra, appealed for saving the school at any cost.

“There have been no adequate teachers for years. How can we send our children to a school that lacks educators? Many have already dropped out,” said Bulu Dasmohonto of Kumidya village.

The newly established upper primary schools, which are called new set-ups, do not have the necessary number of teachers. Therefore, the number of student admissions is low, said a teacher in-charge of a newly set up a girls school in Indpur block.

Several guardians said after studying there were no job opportunities here. Several boys who studied in upper primary are already realising this and have dropped out of school to try other jobs. Several are already registered as migrant labourers.

Number of Students Taking Mid-Day-Meals

To meet the nutritional needs of students, the Left Front government in West Bengal was among the first to introduce mid-day meals in the country in primary and upper primary levels. Later, it was introduced across the country.  In this context, the number of students receiving mid-day meals has become a definitive indicator of enrolment.  During Left Front rule, in the 2010-11 academic year, 72,40,341 students received mid-day meals. After 14 years under the TMC regime, only 46,83,053 students are receiving mid-day meals.  This indicates a decline of 26,57,288 students in primary education — a 35% decrease compared with 2010-11.

The number of students has dramatically decreased at Shibarampur Primary School in Bankura .

The situation is even worse at the upper primary level. In the last academic year, 40,41,666 students were admitted to upper primary in the state. As per state government figures, 23,66,232 students are receiving mid-day meals in upper primary schools. This means enrolment at the upper primary level has decreased by 42%.

When asked, Jagabandhu Banerjee, the District Inspector of School, admitted that the number of students admitted to primary schools had decreased. A section of people was moving to urban areas, he said, adding that therefore, the number of students in villages was decreasing. Efforts are being made to solve this crisis, he added.

The writer covers the Jangalmahal region for ‘Ganashakti’ newspaper in West Bengal.

(All pictures by Madhu Sudan Chatterjee)

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Bengal: Is Govt-Aided School Education Heading For Privatisation? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It has been more than 75 years since the founding fathers (and mothers) of the Constitution took this bold stand when they were shaping the guidelines around which the newly independent country would move forward. A cursory glance at the constitutional debates makes it abundantly clear that a majority of the members – despite their own religious inclination – were clearly of the opinion that schools, whose basic purpose was to open minds of children and not make them a dumping ground of useless information, should never be opened up for any type of religious instruction.

What was important was that they were seeing the perils of poisoning of minds by religious frenzy in this part of the sub-continent, and were keen that the future of independent India should be secured on secular grounds only.

Perhaps it needs emphasising that Article 28 of the Constitution makes it more explicit and does not leave any ambiguity as far its implementation is concerned.

“No person attending any educational institution recognised by the state or receiving aid out of state funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto cultural and educational rights.”

What Does One Mean by Religious Instruction?

The expression religious instruction here has a restricted meaning. It conveys that teaching of customs, ways of worships, practices or rituals cannot be allowed in educational institutions wholly maintained out of State funds.

Much water has flown down the Ganges, the Jamuna and all rivers of the country and it appears that slowly, but not so silently, attempts are on to water down the provisions of this Article and facilitating religious instruction in government schools through the back door.

The manner in which Yogi Adityanath-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh has suddenly decided to hold summer workshops on the Ramayana and the Vedas in government schools across the state, without any broader consultation with the stakeholders involved in this endeavour, is symptomatic of the brazen attitude of the government. We are told that these workshops will be organised under the aegis of the International Ramayana and Vedic Research Institute, Ayodhya, and will include activities, like Ramlila, Ramcharitmanas recitation, Vedic chanting, painting, and mask-making.

As expected, this retrograde move by the Yogi government has generated anger among the broad masses as well as concerned citizens, who have demanded that this move be immediately rescinded.

Broadly they have three big objections:

– One, it clearly goes against the provisions of Article 28 of the Constitution and thus is a violation of constitutional principles and values.

– Two, in a state where people of different faiths have been living together for centuries together – giving primacy to the religion of the majority – will be an act of overt discrimination against all religious minorities, including those handful of students who are atheists.

– Three, such workshops will reinforce the deep-rooted gender and caste discrimination in these scriptures.

The resistance to this move has taken two forms. On the one hand, concerned citizens or political leaders have condemned these attempts as a violation of the Constitution. Leaders like Chandrashekhar ‘Ravan’ of the Bhim Army, also a Lok Sabha MP, has even suggested that if at all the government wants to organise workshops, they should be focused on the Constitution.

Secondly, courts have been approached at various levels with pleas that they condemn such moves and help strengthen the struggle for constitutional values and principles.

One such petition is not only aimed at “[s]afeguarding constitutional values but also at ensuring that our education system remains inclusive, secular, and scientific”. It demands quashing of the orders dated May 5 and May 8, 2025, and seeks following relief.

• Directing authorities to refrain from promoting specific religious texts in schools.

• Ensuring that education remains inclusive, secular, and scientific.

• Stop this act of overt discrimination which sanctifies and legitimises gender and caste discrimination.

The petition also explains why this order of the Yogi government is unconstitutional and harmful to society for the following reasons:

One, such an order violates secularism. Everybody knows that the Constitution recognises secularism as a fundamental feature (S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India, 1994). Mandating Ramcharitmanas and Vedas, which are Hindu religious texts, in public schools promotes a specific religion. This violates Article 28(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits religious instruction in State-run schools.

In Aruna Roy vs.Union of India (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that while comparative study of religions in a secular context is permissible, promoting a single religion’s text is unconstitutional.

Two, such orders promote caste and gender discrimination:

Certain verses in Ramcharitmanas, such as “Dhol, gawar, shudra, pashu, nari, ye sab tadan ke adhikari” (Sunderkand, 58.3) and “Nari swatantra na bhave, pati bina dukh pave” (Ayodhyakand,

60), demean Shudras and women. These verses contradict Article 14 (equality before the law), Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination), and Article 17 (abolition of untouchability) of the Constitution. Promoting such texts in schools not only violates the rights of Scheduled Castes and women but also undermines social equality.

Three, it facilitates attacks on scientific temper: Article 51A(h) of the Constitution imposes a duty on every citizen to promote scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform. Prioritising religious and mythological texts, such as the Ramayana and the Vedas weakens rational thinking and scientific inquiry.

In Santosh Kumar vs. Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development (1994), the Supreme Court stated that education must promote a scientific and rational outlook, not religious superstition.

Four, promote violation of minority rights: Articles 29 and 30 grant minorities the right to preserve their culture and educational autonomy. Mandating Ramcharitmanas imposes a Hindu-centric culture on students from Muslim, Christian, Sikh, and other minority communities, violating their cultural and religious rights (St. Xavier’s College v. State of Gujarat, 1974).

Five, administrative impropriety. This impropriety can be understood in the way an institute under the culture department issued orders directly to officials of the education department, which is a violation of administrative protocols.

The way the Supreme Court emphasised in the U.P Gangadharan vs. State of Kerala (2006)case that administrative actions must follow established protocols. Since the said order has been issued without consultation with the education department, it is illegal and arbitrary.

It is also no small matter that the move facilitates misuse of public funds. Article 27 prohibits the use of taxpayer money to promote any particular religion. The use of public funds for these workshops, such as for teacher training and materials, promotes Hindu religious values, which is against the ruling in Prafull Goradia vs. Union of India (2011) and also displays lack of constitutional morality. We should not forget that in the case of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala (2018), the Supreme Court defined constitutional morality as adherence to principles of equality, liberty, and justice. Promoting caste and gender hierarchies of Ramcharitmanas contradicts these values.

There is nothing surprising about this move by the Yogi government which, as the petition well explains, is a clear “violation of Constitution”. Remember, with the ascent of BJP at the Centre (in 2014), many states opened up various ways and means in which a particular religion — namely Hindu religion — is overtly or covertly promoted.

Take this news item where neighbouring Madhya Pradesh has already introduced Hindu religious texts as part of the curriculum of State government schools. A few years ago, the then BJP government in Rajasthan had come under the scanner of civil liberty activists and educationists for its controversial move to bring Saints-Mahatmas in government schools. It is now history how the Haryana government had decided to include the Bhagwad Gita in the school curriculum, merely a year after Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought his party, the BJP, to power at the Centre.

Such moves, which seem to violate constitutional principles and values, are, in fact, a reinforcement of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS-BJP’s tremendous discomfort with the Constitution itself. It is now history when the Constituent Assembly adopted the draft of the Constitution in November 1949, within three days after its adoption, an editorial in the Organiser (RSS mouthpiece) criticised it in no uncertain terms and praised Manusmriti: [Excerpts from an Editorial on Constitution, Organiser, November 30, 1949). The Hindutva Supremacist movement was praising Manusmriti and counterposing it with the newly adopted Constitution. Another stalwart of the Hindutva movement, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, similarly lambasted the draft of the Constitution and emphasised that Manusmriti should have been made the basis of Indian laws.

What is worth emphasising here is that there are various judgements/interventions of the courts at the highest level itself which have been categorical in cautioning the executive about bringing in religious instructions in schools.

Take the case of a petition filed by a lawyer Vinayak Shah from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, in the Supreme Court. It has challenged the recitation of Sanskrit prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas. According to him, doing so effectively amounts to “religious instructions for schools funded by the government”. This, Shah has argued, violates Article 28(3) of the Constitution, which says that nobody attending educational institutions recognised by the State or those which receive aid out of State funds, shall be required to take part in any religious instruction or religious worship in institutions or premises attached to them—unless they are minors and their guardian has consented to it.

This petition revolves around three issues:

One, it is not right to compel children of all religions, including those from families that are atheist and agnostic, to sing Hindu prayers.

Two, considering the constitutional prohibition on students being made to take religious instruction in government-funded schools, the 1,100 Kendriya Vidyalayas must not insist on holding such prayer meetings every day.

Three, prayer songs obstruct the development of a scientific temper in students, which in turn Violates Article 51A(h) of the Constitution that says that it shall be the duty of every citizen to develop a scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.

Considering the seminal importance of this issue, a bench led by Justice Rohinton Nariman and Justice Vineet Saran have referred the matter to the Chief Justice of India to be examined by a Constitutional Bench comprising at least five judges.

One can also look at a case from Maharashtra where Sanjay Salve, a teacher at a Nashik school had waged a lonely struggle against the management of a school that had refused to give him a raise for he had refused to fold hands during school prayers. Salve approached the courts asking that his right to freedom of expression be protected. He said that he cannot be forced to stand with folded hands during prayers and that singing of prayers amounts to imparting religious education, not permissible under Article 28(1) of the Constitution.

A two-member bench of the Bombay High Court had ruled in his favour, saying that “forcing a teacher to do so [fold hands during prayers] will be a violation of the fundamental rights.

One can also refer to how the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), tasked to assist and advise Central and state governments over school education, shared a manual on sensitising schools to the needs of minority students.

A point worth contemplation in view of the Yogi government’s order is that whether educational institutions can compel students to have religious instruction under the name of moral education, as many such orders are couched in the language of teaching “value” to the students.

Perhaps the draft committee of the Constitution, chaired by B R Ambedkar, was aware of this possibility and had made it explicit that any such act would be a violation of Article 19, which gives the right to freedom of expression to every citizen and its violation would be, in fact, a violation of Article 25(1). It says:

“Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.”

Looking back, one can see the progressive nature of these various articles in the Constitution, instituted by a draft committee — majority of whom were believers and hardly a few who were declared atheists — who were keen that no matter what it takes, schools administered by State funds should never be allowed to give religious instruction in any form. May be after witnessing the Partition of the country, where religion was used as a basis of nationhood by a significant section of the population and which witnessed tremendous bloodletting, they could foresee the importance of keeping religion restricted to one’s private domain.

Whether Yogi government will be allowed to have its way and thus further facilitate dilution of Constitutional principles – with its controversial order of organising Ramayana and Vedic workshops in government schools of UP — is the key question before us today!

Either way, the battle to save the Constitution will continue unabated.

The writer is a senior independent journalist. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post UP: Ramayana, Vedic Workshops in Govt Schools Challenged appeared first on SabrangIndia.