10-27-2005, 09:39 PM
[quote=acharya,Oct 27 2005, 09:22 AM]
History books court controversy again
Abraham Thomas / New Delhi
Reference to plundering Jats, beef-eating Brahmins hurts sentiments----
**********
History is a subject that should teach students to hone their analytical and critical faculties.
1. BEEF:
In todayâs context this is found to be hurtful to most Hindus.
Yet it is undeniable in ages gone past, and the ancient literature does indicate that, meat eating and beef eating was prevalent.
The ancient Indian texts, Rig Veda etc contain references to this, and the Vedic deity Indra too is referred to as eating beef.
Mores changed, and most Hindus will not eat beef, though some do, especially when abroad. A lighter comment came from one individual, who aid â Foreign cows are not holy cowsâ
If a community does not eat beef today, and considers it against their religious beliefs to do so, there is nothing wrong with respecting such sentiments and not needlessly rubbing the salt in.
The question really becomes when and at what grade level/age such material should be taught. This material is then fine at a university level, but does it really need to be emphasized or taught a school level?
2. THE JATS:
The Indian history text books ( and consequently non Indian textbooks)are either devoid of Jat history or dismissive, and the few references that show up are disparaging.
In this case it is not matter of hurting sentiments, but rather of bringing out their history and contributions to the Indian society and culture over the last few thousand years.
The references to Jats are contained only in the History of India texts in the medieval period, when the Muslim Mughal rule was in force.
The summary description:
â They are shown have rebelled against â Imperial Authorityâ and looted Imperial military governors, and military convoys circa 1669- 1750 CE. They are supposed to have made the region Agra to Mathura, Dholpur ( the area known as Braj) unsafe for travel. The took sides in the intra-Muslim conflicts and played politics. They also carved out a short lived state of Bharatpur in the UP/Rajastan area, south of Agra. â
This in a nutshell of what is aught to our children and students today, and it was no different when I was in University some 35 years ago.
My own experience was that I simply could not find any information about my people - the Jats.
Now I have nothing against such a characterization, as long as it is factual and complete.
The facts are a little different.
The Jats have been around for thousands of years and do not suddenly appear in the medieval period as peasants, ryots or serfs to the Muslims/Rajputs.
They were/are fiercely independent and republican, mindful and tolerant of all communities who lived with them, and their social, spiritual, and religious beliefs.
It is they who led the resistance to the Islamic invaders, and most critically, kept the area 300 miles around Delhi out of the clutches of the Muslim Mughals and their religion. It is their valour, and willing to sacrifice their lives, that kept the Hindu scared places- Mathura, Brindaban, Haridwar, and Rishikesh safe from annihilation by the Islamicists..
These places wee not saved because, some priests were singing their chants in the temple! There is not one single instance of any Hindu Rajput Raja, from Rajastan to Kangra or Kashmir, who came to the defence of these sacred places. The Rajput is found instead to be making war on the people of Braj, in league with his Islamic masters at Delhi, not defending it.
The question really becomes, why the Jats are treated so denigrated in Indian History textbooks?
Sadly Indian society is a casteist society, and those who wrote our history, as it is taught today, saw it to their advantage to disparage the Jats, not seeing that it is themselves and the larger Indian society that would suffer in the process.
From Muslim chroniclers, one expects this, as the Jats did not roll over and dies, and gave them no rest.
When Hindu writers R S Sharma, Mahajan, K S Lal etc show an anti Jat bias, for whatever their petty casteist ends, one does experience disappointment.
It is not that the Jats did not record their history. They did, as best as they could, amidst the continual war they were engaged in.
To analyze this, and change this we formed the Yahoo Jathistory group, to bring out and put Jat history in its proper perspective.
The is open to all, is academically oriented, and has members who come from a cross section of communities, religions, professions, including academics, and countries.
[edited: Yahoo link removed. Comments and feedback can be soliticted on this forum - Admin]
Comments and feedback invited.
Ravi Chaudhary
History books court controversy again
Abraham Thomas / New Delhi
Reference to plundering Jats, beef-eating Brahmins hurts sentiments----
**********
History is a subject that should teach students to hone their analytical and critical faculties.
1. BEEF:
In todayâs context this is found to be hurtful to most Hindus.
Yet it is undeniable in ages gone past, and the ancient literature does indicate that, meat eating and beef eating was prevalent.
The ancient Indian texts, Rig Veda etc contain references to this, and the Vedic deity Indra too is referred to as eating beef.
Mores changed, and most Hindus will not eat beef, though some do, especially when abroad. A lighter comment came from one individual, who aid â Foreign cows are not holy cowsâ
If a community does not eat beef today, and considers it against their religious beliefs to do so, there is nothing wrong with respecting such sentiments and not needlessly rubbing the salt in.
The question really becomes when and at what grade level/age such material should be taught. This material is then fine at a university level, but does it really need to be emphasized or taught a school level?
2. THE JATS:
The Indian history text books ( and consequently non Indian textbooks)are either devoid of Jat history or dismissive, and the few references that show up are disparaging.
In this case it is not matter of hurting sentiments, but rather of bringing out their history and contributions to the Indian society and culture over the last few thousand years.
The references to Jats are contained only in the History of India texts in the medieval period, when the Muslim Mughal rule was in force.
The summary description:
â They are shown have rebelled against â Imperial Authorityâ and looted Imperial military governors, and military convoys circa 1669- 1750 CE. They are supposed to have made the region Agra to Mathura, Dholpur ( the area known as Braj) unsafe for travel. The took sides in the intra-Muslim conflicts and played politics. They also carved out a short lived state of Bharatpur in the UP/Rajastan area, south of Agra. â
This in a nutshell of what is aught to our children and students today, and it was no different when I was in University some 35 years ago.
My own experience was that I simply could not find any information about my people - the Jats.
Now I have nothing against such a characterization, as long as it is factual and complete.
The facts are a little different.
The Jats have been around for thousands of years and do not suddenly appear in the medieval period as peasants, ryots or serfs to the Muslims/Rajputs.
They were/are fiercely independent and republican, mindful and tolerant of all communities who lived with them, and their social, spiritual, and religious beliefs.
It is they who led the resistance to the Islamic invaders, and most critically, kept the area 300 miles around Delhi out of the clutches of the Muslim Mughals and their religion. It is their valour, and willing to sacrifice their lives, that kept the Hindu scared places- Mathura, Brindaban, Haridwar, and Rishikesh safe from annihilation by the Islamicists..
These places wee not saved because, some priests were singing their chants in the temple! There is not one single instance of any Hindu Rajput Raja, from Rajastan to Kangra or Kashmir, who came to the defence of these sacred places. The Rajput is found instead to be making war on the people of Braj, in league with his Islamic masters at Delhi, not defending it.
The question really becomes, why the Jats are treated so denigrated in Indian History textbooks?
Sadly Indian society is a casteist society, and those who wrote our history, as it is taught today, saw it to their advantage to disparage the Jats, not seeing that it is themselves and the larger Indian society that would suffer in the process.
From Muslim chroniclers, one expects this, as the Jats did not roll over and dies, and gave them no rest.
When Hindu writers R S Sharma, Mahajan, K S Lal etc show an anti Jat bias, for whatever their petty casteist ends, one does experience disappointment.
It is not that the Jats did not record their history. They did, as best as they could, amidst the continual war they were engaged in.
To analyze this, and change this we formed the Yahoo Jathistory group, to bring out and put Jat history in its proper perspective.
The is open to all, is academically oriented, and has members who come from a cross section of communities, religions, professions, including academics, and countries.
[edited: Yahoo link removed. Comments and feedback can be soliticted on this forum - Admin]
Comments and feedback invited.
Ravi Chaudhary