Maulvis (the
equivalent of priests in religions seminaries or madrassas) are said to be taught the Dars-e-Nizami which the state
wants to change. Indeed, a debate whether changes in the Dars-e-Nazami are
necessary or not has been going on for a long time. It is often alleged that
the Dars-e-Nizami remains unchanged in the madrassas and that it consists of
nothing but mediaeval texts. Thus the maulvis are taught only medieval texts
and do not know anything of whatever has happened after the eighteenth century
when the Dars-e-Nizami was devised. The fact is that what is called the
Dars-e-Nizami is actually a modified verssion of it. Indeed, different madrassas have different versions of
what they call Dars-e-Nizami. Such modifications are only to be expected in a
curriculum which was originally devised in the eighteenth century.
The man who devised the curriculum was Mulla Nizamaddin. Since he was born in
Sihali, a town about twenty eight miles from Lucknow, he is also called Mulla
Nizamaddin Sihalwi. His father, Mulla Qutbuddin, was killed by rivals in 1691.
Since the family had influence in Aurangzeb’s court, the emperor gave them a
big house in Lacknow. This was the famous Firangi Mahal which in now associated
with religious learning. Nizamuddin studied with some famous Islamic scholars
and started teaching himself. In those days one went from teacher to teacher
finishing books. There was no prescribed curriculum though some works were very
well known and one was not considered a learned theologian (alim) till one had finished them. Thus a
certain core syllabus actually existed. What Mulla Nizamuddin did was to
specify it, including such core texts as would be considered indispensable by
most noted authorities, and establish it as a dars (curriculum).
The Dars had grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, logic and
mathematics in addition to the purely theological subjects. The latter were
Islamic Law (fiqh), the Apostolic
traditions (Hadith) and commentary on
the Qur’an (tafsir). These subjects
had sub-branches and ancillary subjects such as Usul-ul-Fiqh (principles of Islamic jurisprudence). Some of the
texts, in Arabic, had been in use since the thirteenth century. However, as
Persian was the official medium of instruction during Muslim rule in India,
their commentaries were in Persian.
The subjects of the Dars were very similar to what the
medieval universities in Europe, which were religious seminaries to begin with,
used to teach. The trivium was made up of grammar, rhetoric and logic. The
theological part was, of course, the essence of the curriculum. The works of
Euclid, Ptolemy, Hippocrates and Galen had been translated from Greek to Arabic
in Southern Europe. These spread northwards as the universities of Paris,
Oxford and Cambridge opened up. Incidentally when Nizam ul Mulk opened a madrassa in Baghdad in 1057, it too drew
upon the some Greek sources for enlightenment in these subjects The purpose of
this madrassa was to combat the influence of the Ismailis. Thus the madrassa
was, even to begin with, an instrument of the orthodox meant to cambat what was
regarded by heresy by them. This defining feature survives to this day as we
sahll see. As for the other subjects
they were given less importance though some seminal texts were introduced. Euclid,
for instance, was admitted in European seminaries (universities) as well as
Islamic ones. Incidentally, even now madrassas
teach Euclid under the name of Aqleedas.
They also teach medicine, including a book by Abu Ali Sina, based on Greek
sources. As the Arabs and Persians first came aeross the Ionian Greeks they
called them Yunani (Ionian) Hence Greek medicine is called Yunani tib in Muslim
sources.
In short, one feature of the Dars-e-Nizami is that it is
medieval. It is this feature which make people highly critical of it. However,
some modifications have been made over time. First, the medium of instruction
changed from Persian to Urdu during British rule. This made it necessary for
the ulema to write commentaries on
the original Arabic texts---and very often on Persian commentaries on them---in
Urdu. This has given rise to a proliferation of commentaries, many still in
Arabic and Persian, which the student has to memorize.
Secondly, in such major madrassas as Deoband and Nadwatul
Ulema modified venisons of the Dars-e-Nizami were adopted. Deoband had an
eight-year course, which is still followed in essence by Pakistani Deobandi madrassas, in which Persian was less in
content than had been taught earlier. In Pakistan too, the changes are not only
sect-wise but also because of other reasons. For instance, some madrassas do teach social studies,
English and Urdu though in the lower classes.
The ancient texts have not been discarded but they are
memorized. There has been a debate going on in the country in general and even
in madrassas, about changing the
Dars-e-Nizami. The Institute of Policy Studies, a think-tank of the Jamat-e-Islami,
organized a conference on 23 and 24 November 1986 in Islamabad on this very
issue. The papers presented in the conference are available in the form of a
book entitled Deeni Madaris Ka
Nizam-e-Taleem (1987). In general, which many participants recognized the
need for change, they were reluctant to do away with the classical canons of
the Dars-e-Nizami. My explanation for this is that the curriculum is also an
identity symbol. It gives a distinctive identity to the madrassas. As the madrassa
system during British India became an anti-colonial resistance symbol to
British hegemony, the ulema have
invested much emotion into it. For them the Dars-e-Nizami is a symbol of
continuity and identity in a world in which they feel besieged by hostile
forces. These hostile forces are the secular system of education introduced by
the British state and continued later. That is why the ulema guard the Dars-e-Nizami against change.
However, the ulema
have introduced changes. For instance, while the ancient texts on Arabic morphology
and syntax stay intact, they are really memorized. The student actually picks
up Arabic from books written by modern writers. These books, written by
Pakistani and Arab writers, teach Arabic according to modern methods. The
International Islamic University in Islamabad, incidentally, has excellent
books with pictures for illustrating how Arabic is used in ordinary life. The
present author was told by maulvis in some Ahl-i-hadith madrassas that they had
introduced computer studies, English and social studies since 2001 with the help of the government
which pays for the salaries of the teachers of these subjects and gives the
equipment etc.
The other major change is that the Dars-e-Nizami is
supplemented by textbooks in Urdu which refute the beliefs of other sects and
sub-texts as well as ideas originating from Western sources. This is part of the orthodoxy-maintaining mission
of th emadrassas since the 11th century when they were first
established for this very purpose. They have always been refuting what the
orthodox have regarded as heresies or deviations. Whether it was Greek
philosophy, Ismailism, Kharji doctrines or some such medieval heresy or those
which were born in the twentieth century, the madrassas have always written
against them. Indeed, they have, in this sense, always been vigilant and have
always engaged with the times and not been stagnant. Thus Deobandi madrassas
have books refuting Barelvi and Ahl-i-Hadith (which are all Sunni sub-sects) as
well as Shia doctrines. The Barelvi books refute Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith
beliefs and so on. Of course, all Sunni books refute Shia beliefs as Shia ones
refute the Sunni ones. These books are not given as part of the Dars-e-Nizami
as such. They are said not to be taught in a formal sense but are made
available in the final year of the madrassas
to students as part of their training in maslak
(i.e. the specific doctrines of the sect and Sub-Sect to which the madrassa belongs). The students are also
taught to refute heretical beliefs and Western ideas. Thus, apart from the
refutation of Qaidaniat (or Mirzaiat), a number of other beliefs are also included
for rejection. Somewhat surprisingly for most educated readers, the views of
Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi, the founder of the revivalist Jamat-i-Islami, are also
refuted by some madrassa texts. One
cannot say to what extent the present coalition of the religious parties, the
MMA, will suspend the familiarization with or reference to texts against each
other’s doctrines. However, to distinguish one school of thought from another
some basic texts will probably be introduced to the students in some way.
As for the refutation of the West, these are in books
which target capitalism, socialism, feudalism, neo-colonial economic domination
of the West and individualism. Some texts also attack the basis of democracy
but most agree with some form of representative rule and the principle of
elections.
All these texts are in Urdu and they are taught for munazra i.e. debate. Students can also
read accounts of munazras held in the
past and learn the polemical style, the strongly emotive tone and the art of
apt quotation from Arabic sources which are necessary to win a munazra.
My contention is that the average maulvi, a graduate of an average madrassa, internalizes this Urdu part of the curriculum much more
then the traditional Dars-i-Nizami. The traditional Dars-i-Nizami keeps
functioning as a symbol of continuity and an identity symbol while the
operative part of the text which really moulds the maulvi’s worldview comes from these Urdu texts (the texts for
refuting rival perspectives) which are not part of the Dars-i-Nizami.
Thus, while on the surface the madrassa curriculum is medieval and unchanging, in reality it
changes to refute whatever seems to threaten it. This threat might be from
alien religions or philosophies but the fact is that the madrassas do counter it. The madrassas,
then, are not static institutions. They are not buried in the past; they are
active and dynamic institutions which have seen themselves as being besieged
since British days and which are still fighting against the external world.
This being so, it seems difficult that the modern state---one of the powers
against which the madrassas have been
arrayed for nearly two centuries---will be able to bring about any real changes
in the madrassas. Moreover, changing
the Dars-e-Nizami while leaving the Urdu texts for refutation intact, will not
being about a change in the worldview of the maulvis. The fact is that the state, which uses the name of Islam
to legitimize itself, is hardly in a position to suggest changes to those who,
at least in their own eyes, specialize in Islam. Thus, in my opinion, any
changes in the education of the maulvis
enforced by the state will alienate and radicalize them further. The only thing
the state can do is to spread its own education system in every nook and corner
of the country making it free and attractive and, thus, reduce the demand for madrassa education among the masses.
This solution will take time and lots and lots of money---that is the catch!
The state does not want to spend that much on education and the peoples’
welfare. In that case, we should not complain if armies upon armies of
radicalized youth, not given education by the state and hence attracted to madrassas, are produced yearly to
challenge the state and those who run it.