Islamic Education, Diversity and National Identity : Helmut Reifeld & Jan-Peter Hartung

Name of Book: Islamic Education, Diversity and National Identity: Dini Madaris in India Post-9/11
Editor: Helmut Reifeld & Jan-Peter Hartung
Publisher: Sage Publications, New Delhi
Year: 2006
Pages: 331
Price: Rs.650
ISBN: 0-7619-3432-4
Reviewed by: Yoginder Sikand

Buy this book

Recent writings on madrasas in South Asia have tended to view them from the point of view either of security or of ‘reform’. Various other crucial aspects of madrasas, including their social, economic, cultural and political roles, have received little attention from both writers who tend to see them in stereotypically negative terms. Yet, as the various contributors to this volume argue, madrasas need to be seen in a broader perspective and the debate about them needs to move beyond security-driven concerns and the agenda of ‘reform’ that is sought to be imposed from without.

Jan-Peter Hartung’s piece on the discourse of madrasa reforms examines various arguments put forward by a range of actors, including many ulama, for suitable modifications in the madrasa curriculum. The central point Hartung makes is that Muslim social activists regard madrasa reform as crucial but yet insist that it must not lead to a complete secularisation of madrasas because they see their principal purpose as being to train ulama or religious specialists. Reform, Hartung says, is not easy, because there is no central church-like authority in Islam that can lay down official doctrine or policy for all Muslims. Reform is made even more difficult by sectarian divisions, because of which a common reform programme is rendered almost impossible.

In another piece included in the book, Hartung looks at the reformist efforts of the Nadwat ul-‘Ulama in Lucknow, dwelling particularly on the influence of the Nadwa in the Arab world, principally as a result of the work of its former rector, the late Sayyed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi. Hartung links the contacts between Nadwa and institutions in the Arab world and elsewhere to accusations about Indian madrasas as being allegedly linked to ‘terrorosm’ levelled by Hindu fascist groups and elements within the state apparatus, and stresses the point that these charges are baseless. He argues that it must be acknowledged that Muslim scholarship has always had a crucial transnational dimension and that this is not a modern phenomenon geared to promoting ‘terrorism’. In fact, he points out, the ulama of the Nadwa and other noted Indian madrasas have always stressed their support of the Indian Constitution as the best presently-available dispensation for Muslims living as a minority in India. Hartung ends his essay with an appeal for the state to adopt a truly integrative policy that acknowledges the rights of every cultural and religious group to protect and preserve its traditions and run its own institutions. In particular, he insists, the ongoing campaign to stigmatise Muslims and the madrasas must cease for there to be any dialogue at all.

Saiyid Naqi Husain Jafri’s article provides a brief overview of madrasa education in late Mughal India and then examines discourses of madrasa reform in colonial India. It shows that an important section of the ulama were indeed open to changes in the madrasa curriculum to meet the challenges posed by British rule, Orientalist, Hindu and Christian critiques of Islam, and the growing tendency towards irreligiousness. This was best exemplified in the case of Lucknow’s Nadwat-ul-Ulama, which, although it was intended to be an alternative to both the Aligarh Muslim University and the Dar ul-Ulum, Deoband, did not prove to live up to the dreams of its founders. Somewhat the same arguments are presented in Farhat Hasan’s paper, which deals particularly with perceptions about madrasas in colonial India. It shows the impact of colonialism on the views of numerous Muslim ‘modernists’ regarding madrasas, challenging the notion of a rigid separation between ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ knowledge in Islam. At the same time, Hasan says, it would be incorrect to regard the ulama as wholly opposed to ‘modern’ knowledge, as is often imagined. What they resented was the tendency to conflate modernity with Western culture, which they saw as inevitably leading to irreligiousness. Thus, for instance, some of the leading elders of the Deoband madrasa allowed for their students to learn ‘modern’ subjects after completing their basic religious degree, and even argued for the need for ulama to learn English, particularly for missionary purposes. The chain of madrasas that began being set up in the period of British rule, Hasan writes, was also intended to counter religious ‘fuzziness’, religious spaces and traditions that Muslims and people of other communities shared with each other, these being seen as ‘un-Islamic’. However, while these madrasas stressed a notion of a unified, essentialised Muslim community, they were, for the most part, associated with one or the other maslak or school of thought, and one of their principal purposes was to combat other, or what were seen as rival, forms of Islam. This inevitably led to increasing sectarianism, and a further fracturing of the wider Muslim community.

Another interesting aspect of the colonial impact on Muslim education, which Saiyid Zaheer Husain Jafri discusses, was the gradual replacement of Sufi hospices or khanqahs by madrasas as major centres of Islamic instruction in colonial India. This he traces to a variety of factors, including to Islamic reformist and colonial critiques of popular Sufism and to the expropriation of landed estates attached to Sufi shrines by the colonial state which undercut their economic viability. The transfer of the management of many of these shrines to government Waqf Boards further undermined the autonomy of the shrines and their traditional role as centres of learning.

Sayyed Najmul Raza Rizvi‘s article examines the history of Ithna Ashari Shia religious education in Awadh, tracing it to the establishment of Shia rule in the area. He shows how royal patronage was crucial in sustaining a number of Shia madrasas in Lucknow and in other towns of the region, many of whose graduates then went on to take up various jobs in the royal court and in the administrative services. This tradition of learning was, however, seriously undermined when the British annexed Awadh and forcibly closed down numerous madrasas. Today, some Shia madrasas survive in Lucknow, and, unlike in the past, are attended mainly by students from poor or lower-middle class families. Some of them restrict themselves to the traditional curriculum, while others have included certain ‘modern’ subjects or else have adjusted their timings to allow their students to attend private or state schools as well. Yet others have adopted the curriculum prescribed by the state-affiliated Arabic and Persian Board that makes provision for some ‘modern’ subjects as well. Another way in which Shia organisations in Lucknow have sought to respond to the growing demand for ‘modern’ education is by setting up or running madrasas and ‘modern’ schools and colleges under the same management body, thereby facilitating the entry of madrasa graduates into the ‘modern’ education system.

Paul Jackson’s paper looks at the past and present of madrasas in Bihar, India’s most poverty-stricken state and home to a sizeable Muslim population. He notes that a number of madrasas in Bihar are affiliated to the state-constituted Bihar Madrasa Board, which provides them with grants-in-aid for teachers for selected subjects. Yet, this model of state assistance to madrasas has not worked satisfactorily, and should serve as a warning to those who argue for more state intervention in order to ‘reform’ the madrasa system. In most cases of aided madrasas, funds from the state come late, if at all, sometimes taking more than two years for the money to be disbursed. The entire process is also racked with corruption and red-tape, for which Bihar is so notorious. Consequently, many madrasa teachers go for long periods without salaries, which, in any case, are pitiably low. Most madrasas have no funds for infrastructural development, appointing good teachers or introducing ‘modern’ subjects, even if they wanted to, as indeed many of them would ideally like to. In these madrasas as well as madrasas not affiliated to the Board, there is no evidence to suggest, Jackson says, any evidence of militant indoctrination or ‘terrorist’ training being imparted to students, who come mainly from very poor families and for whom madrasa education is often the only available avenue of education because it is provided free. It also assures them some sort of employment as religious specialists. In fact, Jackson says, madrasa teachers often stress the importance of harmony between Muslims and people of other faiths, general moral values, the role of the ulama in India’s freedom struggle as well as the need for students to work for the welfare of the country.

In a similar vein, Patricia, Roger and Craig Jeffery discuss madrasas in rural Bijnore, a district with a large Muslim population in the state of Uttar Pradesh. Contesting the argument that Muslims are themselves wholly to blame for their educational marginalisation or that they are averse to ‘modern’ education, the authors point out that significant numbers of Muslim families choose to send their children to madrasas because of poverty, the Hinduistic ethos of government schools and the relative neglect by state educational authorities of Muslim localities. This problem has been particularly exacerbated as a consequence of privitisation, because of which state investement in Muslim education, already negligible, has been further reduced.

The authors write that there is no evidence to suggest that madrasas are engaged in promoting ‘terrorism’ or hostility between Muslims and others, as is often alleged. ‘Indeed’, they say, ‘madrasa staff often comment on the need for religious tolerance and on the variety of legitimate paths to spiritual understanding and morality’. Far from promoting ‘anti-national’ views, many madrasas organise events to commemorate India’s Republic Day and Independence Day, where the duties and rights of citizens of India, Muslims and others, are stressed. A crucial point that the authors make is that the madrasas should not be seen as a radically different form of education, with absolutely no parallels with other systems of education that exist side-by-side in the same region. ‘Far from being hermetically sealed streams of formal education’, they point out, ‘schools and madrasas display numerous inter-linkages and similarities. Teachers in these and other schools�government as well as government-aided and private schools managed by Hindus�and madrasa teachers display overlapping and parallel educational philosophies’, as for instance in their stress on discipline and the importance paid to moral education and obedience. In fact, the authors go on, ‘Schools often display a more militaristic tone in their disciplinary regimes than madrasas, through the physical routines in the daily school assemblies, with children lined up in the school and performing exercises to a senior child’s shouted instructions and the relentless beat of a huge drum’.

Another point that the authors are at pains to stress is that the notion of madrasas and their ulama being relentlessly opposed to girls’ education is erroneous. In fact, they write, in many places girls outnumber boys in maktabs or mosque-schools, and recent years have witnessed the emergence of the number of girls’ higher-level madrasas. These institutions are geared towards what the authors term as ‘domesticated femininity’, training girls to be good mothers and wives in future, their future place being seen as within the home. Yet, even here there are fine nuances that should be recognised. Thus, the authors write of the urban ulama that while they display a variety of views on the quantum and level of education that girls should receive, ‘most are keen to see girls receiving formal schooling even after adolescence’. Related to this is the point that the ulama’s views on girls’ education is not that very different from that of many Hindu community leaders. Thus, they stress, “[S]nipping away the explicitly Islamic aspects of the maulawis’ [ulama’s] views on girls’ education exposes parallels with the rationales of local Hindu and Muslim school teachers, who likewise emphasise the importance of educated mothers in extending the teachers’ ‘civilising’ role into the home�. This role is related to the notion that the ulama, being experts in certain texts and disciplines, are in a position of authority over other Muslims, who, therefore, are seen as being in need of the ulama’s guidance. This ‘civilising’ mission is not, of course, unique to the madrasa teachers, and is, in fact, something that they share with middle class urban dwellers’ views of the poor.

Madrasas have, in recent years, had a bad press, and are routinely described in lurid terms in the non-Muslim media. Marieke Winkelmann’s paper examines Muslim reactions to recent media discourses in India regarding madrasas. She refers to fake intelligence reports designed specifically to malign madrasas as ‘dens of terror’ as feeding into Western and Hindu fascist discourses about Islam, and looks at Muslim defences of the madrasa system from charges of being associated with ‘terrorism’. Partly as a response to ongoing media discourses, many madrasas have recognised the need for ‘reform’ and the author presents examples of certain noted Indian madrasas that have made important efforts to introduce ‘modern’ subjects in their curricula. At the same time, Winkelmann notes that most Indian madrasas are opposed to state offers of assistance for ‘modernisation’, seeing these as insincere and motivated to dilute their autonomy and their Islamic identity. In any case, she says, government-run madrasas are known for their low standards because their teachers, being assured of a regular salary, do not generally take their duties seriously. Hence, the best hope for reform is from within, rather than by being imposed by the state or any other external agency.

Appealing for a shift in the way in which madrasas are often discussed today, in terms of whether or not they have any association with ‘terrorism’, Arshad Alam argues the case for understanding madrasas in the particular social contexts in which they are located. After making the point that the madrasas that he has visited have no association whatsoever with militancy, he argues that the largely ‘low’ caste/class student profile of the madrasas is related to the fact that they provide free education and access to the Islamic scriptural tradition for these groups, which is a powerful symbolic asset in their quest for upward social mobility. At the same time, Alam argues, madrasas must be seen as ‘hegemonic institutions’, with one of their ideological functions being to maintain class relations within Muslim society, being largely silent on issues of class and caste dominance within the community, thereby reproducing the ‘Muslim elite agenda of identity’. Alam argues for the need to interrogate this silence on internal divisions within the community for, as he puts it, “Islam in India cannot be carried on the tired shoulders of poor lower-caste Muslims, while the ‘benefits of Islam’ continue to be cornered by privileged sections of the Muslim communities in India�.

Yoginder Sikand’s article examines the diverse ways in which madrasa reform is imagined by a range of actors, including ulama, Muslim ‘modernists’ and Islamists. These views are related to the different ways in which the notion of Islamic knowledge is constructed, being presented as static and fixed but, in actual practice, being internally contested. The author notes that some ulama see no need for reform in the madrasa curriculum and argue that since the madrasas produced great scholars in the past they can continue to do so today and in the future by using the same curriculum. They regard the traditional curriculum as perfect and hence see no need to change or to learn from others. In a sense, this is related to their claim of being authoritative spokesmen of the faith, this resting on their mastery of certain texts. If these texts are altered or if the curriculum is expanded to include ‘modern’ disciplines their claims to authority might well be undermined. Others argue that if ‘modern’ subjects are included it might lead their students astray, being trapped by the snares of the world.

However, Sikand suggests that the notion that the madrasas are wholly opposed to reform is erroneous. He highlights numerous cases of madrasas that have incorporated ‘modern’ subjects into their curriculum. Of particular concern in this regard is the controlled ‘modernisation’ that the ulama argue for, and their point that it should not lead to the complete secularisation of the madrasas or turn them into general schools or dilute their specifically ‘religious’ character, because their particular function is the training of religious specialists. Hence, they insist, ‘reform’ should be such that would enable the ulama to perform their task as religious specialists in the contemporary context. There is no need, they stress, for specialised training in ‘modern’ subjects as then the burden on the students would be simply too great and they would be ‘neither good for this world nor for the next’. At the same time, they stress that Muslim parents who want to educate their children in ‘modern’ subjects are free to send them to ‘modern’ schools. Arguments for reform are also linked to the recognition of the need for the widening of career options of madrasa graduates, to counter anti-Islamic propaganda, to the need to develop a religious leadership that can help empower the community and to awareness of the fact that unless the ulama are aware of contemporary debates they may not be able to reach out to non-Muslims as well as to ‘modern’ educated Muslims. The actual pace of this reform is, however, slow, and, besides inertia, it is also related to the poor financial conditions of most madrasas.

This book, bringing together diverse perspectives on India’s madrasas, is a major contribution to present debates on the subject. It strongly suggests the need to examine madrasas in terms different from which they are often seen, as simply in terms of their political roles. It marks an important shift in they way in which madrasas are often described, as simply religious institutions, by seeking to locate them in the social contexts in which they are located. The ‘Post 9/11’ tag attached to the subtitle of the book is, of course, unfortunate, and reflects the tendency of Western ‘scholars’ [this book is the outcome of a conference organised by a conservative German foundation] to see the world through Western lenses, and to impose an event occurring in the West as a defining moment for the rest of the world. That, the unnecessary historical details that abound in certain articles and the considerable overlaps between several of the contributions detract from the merit of the book, but that is no reason why the book itself should not be recognised as a valuable effort to bring an element of seriousness into ongoing discussions about madrasas, which is still dominated by those who actually know little about them.


Table of Contents

Preface
Helmut Reifeld
Towards a Reform of the Indian Madrasa? An Introduction
Jan-Peter Hartung

Part I: Historical Perspectives

1. A Modernist View of Madrasa Education in Late Mughal India
Saiyid Naqi Husain Jafri
2. Madaris and the Challenges of Modernity in Colonial India
Farhat Hasan
3. Madrasa and Khanaqah, or Madrasa in Khanaqah? Education and Sufi
Establishments in Northern India
Saiyid Zaheer Husain Jafri
4. Shi'a Madaris of Awadh: Historical Development and Present Situation
Syed Najmul Raza Rizvi
Part II: Regional Perspectives
5. The Nadwat al-'ulama': A Chief Patron of Madrasa Education
in India and a Turntable to the Arab World
Jan-Peter Hartung
6. Madrasa Education in Bihar
Paul Jackson, S. J.
7. Understanding Deoband Locally: Interrogating Madrasat diya' al-'ulum
Arshad Alam
8. Islamic Education in a Tamil Town: The Case of Kilakkarai
Torsten Tschacher
Part III: Current Developments
9. The First Madrasa: Learned Mawlawis and the Educated Mother
Patricia Jeffery, Roger Jeffery and Craig Jeffrey
10. Muslim Reactions to the Post 9/11 Media Discourse on the Indian Madaris
Mareike Jule Winkelmann
11. The Indian Madaris and the Agenda of Reforms
Yoginder Sikand
Part IV: A View from Within
12. The Introduction of Natural Sciences in Madrasa Education in India
Syed Abul Hashim Rizvi
Afterword: Dialogue and Cooperation with the Islamic World
Gunter Mulack
About the Editors and Contributors
Index