Rewriting of Indian history anti-Muslim, anti-reason: Irfan Habib
Aligarh, India – The Indian Hindu nationalist government has removed chapters on centuries of Islamic rule in the subcontinent, including that of the Mughals, from some textbooks.
The government, led by the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), has also removed references to Muslims’ contribution to the country’s freedom struggle against British colonial rule.
The textbooks revised by a government-run educational body glorify ancient India, often without the support of historical fact.
Historians say the revision of textbooks is part of the BJP’s Islamophobic project to deny Muslims their place in India’s history.
Al Jazeera spoke to historian Irfan Habib, a world-renowned authority on Mughal history, to gain insight into the BJP’s project to rewrite history and the impact it will have on the spread of knowledge in the South -Asian country, where 200 million Muslims live.
Al Jazeera: Why is the BJP removing Mughal and other Muslim rulers from textbooks?
Irfan Habib: Well, it’s not alone [about] removing the Mughal rulers. They are actually trying to unify Indian history by removing or belittling Muslims. But this is only part of BJP project, the other part is not only omission but also myth making.
Al Jazeera: Can you talk about the recent changes in textbooks in India?
Habib: In the ancient Indian history syllabus recommended by the UGC [University Grants Commission, the body that governs the universities in India], the caste system is omitted from history. It claims that Muslims introduced the caste system during the Middle Ages.
Every virtue should be attributed to ancient Indian civilization.
It is not just bias, but lies and untruths are glorified. This Aryan company is just like the Nazis.
According to the new design BA [Bachelor of Arts] history syllabus proposed by the UGC, India is believed to be the original home of the Aryans. It explains that Aryans went from here to civilize the world.
Historians must prove by establishing facts, they cannot make up facts. You cannot create an Aryan race. And this is an insult to Sanskrit, because in earlier Sanskrit texts, Arya is actually an area of Iran. Iran is plural of Arya. Iran actually means [the land of] Aryans.
Now you make Aryans a race, like Hitler did. Ancient Iranian and Rig Vedic Sanskrit are very close to each other, they are sister languages. Arya means a very respectable and noble person, it does not mean the race. From there you see it’s not just anti-Muslim, it’s anti-reason.
Al Jazeera: Can you talk a little bit about the Indian knowledge system and how it is now framed by far-right Hindus?
Habib: I recognize that historical sources are such that they can have a Hindu common interpretation, an Islamic common interpretation, and you can have a Marxist interpretation.
When the organizer [magazine published by far-right Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the BJP’s ideological mentor] published an article stating that Maan Singh had built the Taj Mahal, historian Ramesh Chandra Majumdar wrote to them: “I will not read your paper now and you have no right to publish any of my papers”. Majumdar came from the Hindu common school of historians but nevertheless he was a professional and did not accept any unproven fact be it of ancient or medieval India.
Al Jazeera: The Hindu right has always viewed the Mughals as outsiders. Now they are also attacking Muslim leaders such as freedom fighter Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and 18th century ruler Tipu Sultan.
Habib: Azad’s exclusion is anti-Muslim. They do not want to show that Muslims were involved in the Indian freedom movement.
In the case of Tipu Sultan, it is a total reversal of the national question. Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru [India’s first prime minister] and others always had very good words for Tipu. The suppression of the Malabar Rebellion by Tipu cannot be justified. But that could be said of almost any ruler of the time. But what he did for Mysore and the modernization of the economy, and his fight against the British colonialists cannot be brushed aside. I should point out that the Indian History Congress published three volumes on Tipu in 1999. Thus, Indian historians disagree with the BJP.
Al Jazeera: Names of cities and roads with Muslim names will be erased. How does it affect the public memory of Muslims and their historical heritage?
Habib: They want to destroy public memory. Aurangabad’s original name was Khirki and it was re-founded by Muslim Malik Ambar, an African. So Malik Ambar is an outsider because he is an African and he is also a Muslim hence he cannot be mentioned. You cannot call it Ambarnagar, which you should if you are interested in history, or you should call it Khirki. But Sambhajinagar [Aurangabad’s new name] makes no sense as Sambhaji never went to Aurangabad.
Taj Mahal earns a dollar. But they quietly promote the popular perception that Taj Mahal was originally a Shaivite temple. The English [colonial rulers] a conductor was placed to protect the Taj against lightning strikes. Now the BJP and its supporters call the conductor a Trishul [trident, a holy Hindu symbol]. It’s this kind of popular misconception that they make.
Al Jazeera: Why does the BJP want to rewrite history? The project has two aspects: the demonization of the Mughals and the glorification of the Hindu past. Can you explain that?
Habib: Their goal is to demonize Muslims, including the Mughals. You see, they have some problems. Let me spell them out for you. The word Hindu is Arabic. Why don’t they throw it away first? Religion itself is a Semitic concept brought to India, now they [BJP] try to shape Hinduism accordingly.
In fact, the word Hindu is not used in Sanskrit literature until the 14-15th century. And even the Vijayanagar Emperors called themselves Hindu Rai Suratran, that is Sultan over Hindu Rai. This is very interesting how the words developed. But here you can see yourself applying concepts from Indian religious history that come from Islam.
They apply fantasies as if India is the mother of democracy. No historian has admitted that India was the mother of democracy. Rig Veda talks about Rajas, which means chieftain. Yes, you find democracy in ancient Greece and Rome, but you never find it in India, you never find it in China, you don’t find it in Iran. I say show me a serious historian of ancient India who said that.
The Sanskrit name for that period is Mahajanpada, which means non-democratic republic. It means tribes. No serious historian I’ve read – communal or otherwise – has ever argued that there was democracy in ancient India. To remove the caste system from ancient India is a total denial of history.
Al Jazeera: The BJP says historical mistakes are being corrected. What was wrong in the textbooks? Critics say myths are pushed like history. As a historian, what do you say to that?
Habib: You see, I can give an example of the Ahoms of Assam. Now if you look at the speeches at Ahoms door [India’s] Home Minister Amit Shah and Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma present the Ahom as the leading nationalist and the Mughals as foreigners. But they forget that the Ahom language is the Thai language, that their descendants have come to call themselves Thai Ahoms. Today they are both Hindus and Muslims. They were clearly Thai, they were not Hindu.
So you not only revise history, but also create myths. And when they say they drove out the Mughals, they forget that Guwahati finally fell to the Mughals in 1679. Just to celebrate Ahom who was as foreign as Mughals, or as Indian as Mughals, because they both came from abroad. How Much Would You Lose If Mughals Are Expelled From Indian History? Taj Mahal is coming out, Red Fort is coming out and the earliest statistical work in the world – Ain-i-Akbari – is coming out.
They apply fantasies as if India is the mother of democracy. No historian has admitted that India was the mother of democracy.
Al Jazeera: What will be the impact on India’s education system and society if the state monopolizes knowledge production with a clear anti-minority bias?
Habib: It is not just bias, but lies and untruths are glorified. This Aryan company is just like the Nazis. What if you’re an Aryan? How do you become greater and nobler if you are an Aryan? Claiming the Indus Valley Civilization as Sanskrit and calling it Saraswati is absurd. Taj Mahal is an asset, but you are driving it out of your history.
Al Jazeera: Do you think the BJP mirrors 1930s Nazi Germany in terms of propaganda and revision of history?
Habib: Well, actually MS Golwalkar [RSS leader] praised the Nazis. Certainly, the RSS founders were heavily influenced. In the 1970s, Golwalkar praised Hitler’s treatment of the Jews, whatever they might now say about Israel.
Al Jazeera: The Hindu right wing says there was massive conversion of Hindus under the Mughals and other Muslim rulers. Muslim rulers are also accused of destroying temples. They call it a dark period in history. How do you react to that?
Habib: This is actually quite absurd. You see when Hajjaj ibn Yusuf sent Muhammad Bin Qasim to Sindh [in the eighth century], he asked him to treat the Hindus as they treated the Christians and the Parsis, that is, be tolerant. Mohammed Bin Qasim did not destroy a single temple. In fact, the Multan Temple was destroyed by the heretics. So they give a completely wrong impression.
Now I might say that Hajjaj’s policy was not driven by a great religious spirit of tolerance, but simply by practicality. When you invade a country, you don’t antagonize all its people. Multani merchants were greatly promoted by Muslim rulers and Mughals naturally had very large sections of Hindu officials. An ordinary Muslim had little chance of climbing the ladder. Aurangzeb’s chief finance minister was a Hindu, his chief officer was Viceroy Raja Jay Singh of the Deccan. Of course the Mughals were not democrats, but they were not out to convert people by force either.
The best part is if you read European stories about India in Aurangzeb’s time, they say any religion was allowed – you can go to a temple, you can go to a mosque, you can go to a church. There was no parallel in this Europe or in the Islamic world.
If you refer to Persian sources, the picture is very different, although I would say that the English translation, which is also available, is often misleading. It cannot be denied that temples have been destroyed. No one defends Aurangzeb’s discriminatory measures, but at the same time it will be wrong not to compare India’s position with other countries where religious tolerance did not exist. If you compare it with the other countries [in 18th century]Aurangzeb’s India looked tolerant.