Unsung heroes and our medieval knowledge

Published: May 27, 2012

The Mughals only built huge palaces and monuments with no contribution to scientific progress, literature or education. Most of them were ruthless self-serving religious bigots. PHOTO: APP/FILE

Names such as Bhagat Singh, Mangal Panday, Rani Lakshmibai etc are never even remotely mentioned in Pakistani course books.


Their contributions as well as those of other unsung (at least in Pakistan) heroes are immense and should not be so arrogantly ignored.

I love the fact that the entire Islamic nation, especially Pakistan, is so stuck in and obsessed with the glory days of yore.

There’s no doubt that the Arab and Persian scientists from the medieval era made huge contributions to science, but why do we Pakistanis fail to acknowledge that they were Arab or Persian rather than Indians (which we are ethnically) or Muslims, for that matter?

Why do we feel proud of their achievements?

Is it because as, an ethnic group, Muslims of the sub-continent don’t have much to be proud of? Or is it because of the dearth of any modern achievements from the entire Muslim world?

Let me attempt to deconstruct it with a little bit of history from our part of the world.

The Mughal Empire

We can relate more with the Mughal Empire, that too only because the Empire was based in the Indian subcontinent and not because the emperors’ ethnicity, as Mughal emperors were Turks/Tajiks.

The Mughals, however, only built huge palaces and monuments.

Their contribution to scientific progress, literature and education is close to non-existent. Most of them were ruthless self-serving religious bigots. They only cared about themselves and many of them had full-blown wars with their own siblings to capture power.

The only Mughal Emperor of note was Akbar and in the true sense of the word, you can’t really call him a Muslim, since he started his own form of religion and called it Deen-e-Elahi.

Past the Mughal Empire, the Muslims of the sub-continent have no one to look up to; there has been no significant contribution from Muslims of the sub-continent in any regard. Of course there are exceptions to that (Dr Abdus Salam’s name springs to mind) but in a large part Muslims have severely lagged behind.


This happened because the wealthy (and to some extent royal) Muslims of the sub-continent felt somehow superior to the Hindus. In their minds they were the rulers and not peasants and the thought of living under a Hindu led country, after independence, would be an insult. So they devised a plan to build a country for their own benefit, where they can still be the rulers and suck the blood out of the poor.

The examples are all around us, just look at the feudal lords and almost all of our current and past politicians.

Where did they get their money and real estate, if not from the British?

They didn’t want to give all that up in the name of United India. The ones, who weren’t fortunate enough to get anything from the British, later became our overlords by capturing or ‘claiming’ the properties left behind by Hindus and Sikhs who migrated to India.

Besides, if you look at the original concept of the two-nation theory, Jinnah and Iqbal didn’t intend a separate sovereign country. Their intentions were more aligned with getting separate states for Muslims within the greater India. This can be proved by reading just a few lines from both, his Allahabad address and the letter he sent to The Times in 1930 after his Allahabad address.

Let me quote the lines I’m talking about, from his presidential address:

The principle of European democracy cannot be applied to India without recognising the fact of communal groups. The Muslim demand for the creation of a Muslim India within India is, therefore, perfectly justified.

From his letter to The Times after the fact:

I do not put forward a ‘demand’ for a Muslim State outside the British Empire…

He further says,

No Indian Muslim with any pretence to sanity contemplates a Muslim State or series of States in North-West India outside the British Commonwealth of Nations as a plan of practical politics.”

These two quotes clearly demonstrate that Iqbal was not in favour of a separate state for Muslims outside of the British Empire or the greater Indian State. But somehow the idea of an entire new country got introduced and became a part of the movement.

Moreover, the average person in Pakistan never gets to hear about this, the true motives of our founding fathers, nor about the many fundamental struggles made by the non-Muslims of the sub-continent in the quest for independence from the British.

Names such as Bhagat Singh, Mangal Panday, Rani Lakshmibai etc. are never even remotely mentioned in Pakistani course books, why?

Didn’t they, along with the Muslims, contribute to our collective independence?

In any case, the sub-continent is now divided and Pakistan has been created.

Nothing can change this political reality.

So now we need to change the mindset of our people.

We need to shake this false superiority complex off. The time is now! Education alone is not the key, but the correct form of education is. We need to somehow spark the interest of science in our coming generations. Religion should only be allowed as a private matter. The separation of religion and state is of paramount importance; only then can the government focus on providing quality education to the masses without convoluting religious dogmas and historically irrelevant information in it.

By not educating the masses about the struggles of our non-Muslims and instead teaching them the glories of Arabs and Persians, we have given people a false sense of superiority and apathy.

This apathy has crept in so deep within us that in this dark sub-continental (Muslim) history we can only relish the glorious days of medieval Arabia that we were never even part of.

This post originally appeared here.

Read more by Danish here, or follow him on Twitter @Danisshhhh

Danish Shah

Danish Shah

The author is an IT professional by day and a quasi couch/facebook/twitter activist by night. He tweets @Danisshhhh (twitter.com/Danisshhhh)

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • Imad Uddin

    Appreciating the struggle of our Hindu fellows will also increase the love and sense of security in them. Being another religion does not mean being another creature. We do have rani of jhansi in o levels textbooks…but not more of them.
    But it is more than just changing textbooks. Because Muslims are in majority they have a greater responsibility to take care of their minorities. Who else will take care of their rights if not us?
    A famous sentence from the movie Spider-man, “With power comes the responsibility”
    But we should not insult the existence of Pakistan. There can be several point of views, bringing it completely under the conspiracy theory “that it was economic purposes of the rich individuals” is also slightly premature.
    What matters most is what today Pakistanis want and how we deal with our hindu brothers today.
    We should set examples of our love for our hindu and christian brother…Recommend

  • azhar88

    it is funny how the author assumes that seperation of religion and state is the biggest problem that we face; that if we shun religion from the public realm then all of a sudden our politicians like zardari and others will begin serving the people. from my perspective the problem is moral and spiritual bankruptcy in muslims ie religion is used for judging people and not used for serving people. if we as muslims were really following in the footsteps of our prohet Muhammad (s.a.w) then we wouldnt be in such a state. and why do we forget that all this trial and tribulation that has befallen us is also from Allah, because of our own nafs.

    as far as our teaching about bhagat singh and others we should definitely be teaching about them because they were great courageous men. and should we teach our kids how the most of the mughals only cared about power? yes absolutelyRecommend

  • azhar88

    oh and why do i feel connected with our collective muslim history rather than just the history of the suncontinet? simply because i put muslim brotherhood ahead of my nationalistic or regional connection. U have a problem with it?Recommend

  • politically incorrect

    Extremely couragious the Author and ET.
    It’s not easy to confront the elephant in the room.
    Nobody has ever suffered from a little introspection.Recommend

  • Abdul Moiz

    Bhagat singh was atheist so he’ll never get mentioned in our school books as a hero.According to our society,a hero in pakistan must always be a pious muslim; atheists or non-muslims cannot feature in our list of heroes.Recommend

  • Faraz Jibran

    Our extreme obsession with religion has forced us to dicard anyone in our past who is not Muslim.Hindu,sikhs,christians,parsis or atheists and agnostics heroes of this region’s past have deliberately been sidelined from our history books.We prefer to teach our children that pakistan’s heroes can only be Muslims;non-muslims or non-religious people are unworthy of being deemed our heroes.
    This bias against atheists,agnostics,non-Muslims has only led to a society that is extremely intolerant,bigoted and self-righteous.Recommend

  • A reader

    Great article. The word Mughal is actually a Persian pronunciation of the word Mongol. Mongolians themselves are a Turkic Tribe. When the Mongols captured large parts of Central Asia, which historically were part of Greater Iran, during their military campaigns, they displaced the native Persian populace, but adopted Persian customs including language – spoken and written, along with the Islamic religion. The picture you have in this article shows Iranian looking gentleman wearing Turkic military attire. The Mughals, or Mongols from Central Asia were Persian speaking, but not truly Iranians – Babur, Ghazni, Gauri, Jalaludin Khwarazm et. al. would have appeared more along the lines of the gentleman in the following picture:

    Color picture of Emir of Bukhara, 1910

  • Akbar

    Very very very well said and slammed into bigots. Danish you take care where ever you are-there are very nasty false pride bigots all over. Just the fact that islam was one of last religions to come to subcontinent and there needs to be some adjustment with other religions has been ignored.Recommend

  • kaalchakra

    Ridiculous article. Can’t believe it was written by anyone who knows history, who knows how Muslims did everything in their power to work with Hindus but were frustrated and backstabbed at every turn. Is Pakistan going to dump true greats of history only to include nobodies only because these were not Muslim? No way.Recommend

  • syed

    well penciled, Quite frankly religion is an private affair.’No one knows who the god is but if one he does knows everyone’.Recommend

  • Indian

    Damn. text books. that’s the root cause of this mess.Recommend

  • Rehan

    Refreshing read. I’ve always maintained that Pakistani education at even the elite schools is primarily brain-washing to make our young ones feel that they are part of the larger middle-east instead of South Asia.
    The Arabs and Persians have always been, and it seems they will continue to remain, a barbaric people who are the laughing stock of the the world. Accounts of their brutal invasions and forced conversions in our land are all too well-known to most scholars. Their descendants, the Mughals, carried much of that barbarity, in addition to laziness and incompetence, when they themselves came to power. That was perhaps the darkest period of the sub-continent’s history.
    Yet, us Pakistanis rush to kiss their feet at any chance they get. Truly pathetic.
    Us Pakistanis should instead be proud of our rich Indian heritage.
    Warmest Regards,

  • Zaid Hamid

    What is all this pseudo-liberal nonsense. You watch all western media which spreads lies like vaccinations and the world is round etc.

    You should visit me during one of my lectures. I will give you full scholarship to best madrassa in Saudi Arabia to ‘reeducate’ yourself.Recommend

  • David Smith

    A well-intentioned article, thank you. But really, nobody in India is bothered. Assimilative by nature, Indians have taken from all cultures, and moved on. Our problems are of the present – poverty and illiteracy, public health and environmental degradation, corruption and governance (or the lack of it) etc. As for the past, we shall leave that for scholar-historians, such as yourself. Good luck.Recommend

  • BlackJack

    Well-written piece. The reasons for the Arab/ Persian hero worship and omission of any non-muslim leaders/ freedom fighters from the Pak narrative is simple – if you have the same history and heroes as India, then the 2-nation theory has no relevance. While you mention Akbar as the Mughal of note (this is what is taught in India), my understanding is that Aurangzeb is the true hero for Pakistanis. These fears of being unable to establish a distinct identity post-partition may have been justified initially, but Pakistan refused to see that the Indian muslims (who stayed behind) did not lose their culture or religion despite being part of the Indian mosaic; instead you continued to build on the 2-nation theory with the Pakistan ideology, the anti-Hindu content in text books, the Islamic bomb and the continued anti-India rhetoric in civil society. It is ironic that in your overpowering desire to distinguish yourselves from India, you have made it impossible to have an independent positive national identity – and you still need an India to define what you are not.Recommend

  • Dee Cee

    Sir, Indian textbooks do talk about other great Muslim rulers from India, namely Muhammad bin Tughlaq (the mad king who tried to introduce paper currency), Sher Shah Suri (for his revenue system which was later used by Akbar, and for his road building), Hussein Shah in Bengal (for his just ruling system and for the patronage of Arts), Siraj Ud Daula and the great Tipu Sultan (for their fight against the British) etc. You cannot say that there are no medieval Muslim heroes from the sub-continent (and I am not even counting the religious figures and artists and rare souls like Dara Sikoh).Recommend

  • http://www.twitter.com/ahsanzee Ahsan


    Brother its not you its the educational system’s indoctrination speaking.Recommend

  • geeko

    This happened because the wealthy (and to some extent royal) Muslims of the sub-continent felt somehow superior to the Hindus.

    That’s a reducing historical perspective, not only because even the Hindus didn’t feel equals to the Muslims, at least from what I’ve read in Punjab, but only the “wealthy and to some extent royal Muslims” of central India were pro-Partition, the same demographics in Punjab was in fact against Partition, and it’s quite logical : our (Punjab) “wealthy” class was feudal (unlike the “royalty” of central Indiian Muslims who were, let’s put that way, more services-oriented ; magistrates, …) and had a lot to loose by loosing East Punjab (in today’s India) as they had their fields there. That’s why the Unionist Party was formed by the Punjabi Muslim “bourgeoisie” (Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan, …) whereas the Muslim Leage had more “middle-class” individuals with generally liberal professions and outlook (M.A. Jinnah, Muhammad Iqbal, Abdul Qayyum Khan, Chaudhry Rahmat Ali, … all either studied in the Western world or were teachers, barristers, …)

    That’s about Punjab and central India ; about Bengal, you probably know that Bengalis are the first to struggle for the Pakistan Movement, and if they did it, it was not the pro-“wealthy and royal” class, but the poorest ones (whereas in Punjab the feudals were generally Sikhs and Muslims, in Bengal it was the other way, the bourgeoisie was generally a West Bengal-based bourgeoisie.)

    But in Pakistan that feudal class indeed became master of the political authority, but it’s not because Pakistan was made by them, but that the feudal power structure just benefited them. What Pakistan should have done was land reforms.

    Agree with the rest though.Recommend

  • malik

    Fine article except for this line: “Didn’t they, along with the Muslims, contribute to our collective independence?”

    Britishers actively favored Muslims as against the majority Hindus for their own selfish reasons and Muslim leaders repaid their debts by being loyal to the British rule. The role of Muslims (and Christians) during the freedom movement is almost Nil. Very very few Muslim leaders (from the Muslim League) went to jail during the Independence struggle. In fact, I can’t think of even one one name. Recommend

  • Parvez

    Nice article but the system will not change because there is a vested interest involved.
    The 2% who rule, do so by keeping the 98% semi-literate and ensuring that what little education they receive is tailored to keep the balance so. Recommend

  • Danish Shah

    No one’s asking you to not be proud of your collective muslim history. However, it becomes an issue when we start gloating about it and calling it ‘our own’, in return creating a profound culture of apathy. South Asians (especially muslims) had no role to play in the Arab golden age simply because there weren’t any here back then. Muslims of south asia are not descendants of Arabs!
    Besides, this article is about education and how people percieve their history, not about the political turmoil or corruption etc. So of course, separation of religion and state is one of the biggest issues we have in that regard. Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    The value of your article might diminish by getting a thumbs up from across the border. But, got to say, its a fantastic article.

    No nonsense stuff, with appropriate quotes.

    The fact too is that its not black and white. Humans have a grey area, every single one in fact. JInnah and Iqbal had grey areas too.

    That is why there is so much confusion and debate in Pakistan as to what Jinnah really wanted and represented. Jinnah on one hand quotes verses from the Quran, speaks volumes upon the Islamic faith, yet he gives a differently oriented speech after Pakistan’s creation.

    He speaks of freedom, yet he doesn’t even speak against the greatest scourge of pre-Partition India- Feudalism and even allows Feudalism.

    The Pakistani nation has imbibed the values of its founder. Both the Right and the Liberals own him. A very confused situation.

    If you contrast this with India, you will not find such confusion. Indian Constitution reflects its ideology beautifully, the ideology which mirrors that of Nehru and Gandhi. Recommend

  • kaalchakra

    David Smith

    There is a real difference between India and Pakistan. It is not related to textbooks, and it is wise not to ignore it. Pakistan cannot overlook the True Religion (one which, as Imaad Uddin explained so well in his brilliant work, is revealed in God’s own words, not which paraphrases God’s words).

    India may be moving as you said, but it is surely moving directionless.Recommend

  • Cynical


    You are incorrigible.Likes of are the reason why we are what we are, mostly.Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli

    In that time whole wolrd conditions were same sh…. and mughals did lot of things thats why we have seprate country in the heart of india the question is what we are doing what English lang made us what english speaking crrupts doing with us keep in mind what we are
    today its not mughals fault this is our english slaves who are responisible for this.Recommend

  • Ali Tanoli

    OK they did not do any thing but is there English speaking crrupts doing something…Recommend

  • http://Karachi ashar

    Religion should only be allowed as a private matter
    I agree with you as far as religions other than Islam are concerned. However, Islam is a collective matter and deals with the entire systems of living therefore making it private matter means destabilizing it or making it practically defunct with respect to the purpose it was revealed for.

    while rest of the article is worthless based upon superficial knowledge Recommend

  • Same tired argument, over and over again by different writers. Who says we are Arabs? We are central Asians, south asians and greater middle east.


  • Parvez

    Very valid argument made by you. The system is deliberately kept in this dysfunctional pathetic mess by vested interest. The 2% who rule this country ensure that the 98% remain semi-literate with a trace of education thrown in, so that the balance of power is firmly in their control. Some call this the ‘feudal mindset’. Recommend

  • Rationalist

    A very laughable pseudo-intellectual effort by the author. At least read Salam’s “Ideals and Realities”. Furthermore, read about some history: sub-continental and of the rational Muslim thinking (1001 Inventions, perhaps) before attempting such un-informed gibberish. Your ill-logic is not very different from that of the localised loud-mouthed army Junta and tunnel-visioned mullahs, which Islam is not. Things are not as simplistic as you state; reading Ayesha Jalal might also prove good for your malaise….Good luck….Recommend

  • MilesToGo

    Clubbing Arabs with Persians will be unfair. Even Arabs could be called victims in similar ways as Germans.Recommend

  • Yuri Kondratyuk


    i put muslim brotherhood ahead of my nationalistic or regional connection

    So you feel more connected to history of Somalia than history of India?Recommend

  • http://www.twitter.com/ahsanzee Ahsan


    The Tragedy is that whatever little education and development the 98% gets is so full of this mindset that even if someone from the 98% does come into power they themselves become feudal lords. Case-in-point : KarachiRecommend

  • S. Zafar Iqbal

    The intellectual and scientific contribution that Arabs, Persians and Turks made to human civilization is a part of our common human heritage. We all should be proud of it. To say that we should somehow be embarrassed about recognizing their contribution, or be squeamish about praising their achievements, just because they happen to be Muslims defies logic.

    If this attitude is not highly discriminatory, narrow-minded and prejudicial, then what is? One would have though that this mind-set was a thing of the dark ages, and in this day and age a little bit more tolerance would be allowed towards the “others”.

    The separation of religion and politics is a moot issue, for in Pakistan there is no religion in politics. As we can see from their behavior our politicians check out their morals and religious beliefs outside the door before entering the political arena. Our problem is not “religion in politics”, but “politics in the religion.

    On “the separation of church and state” let me quote Allama Iqbal, who said: ” Jooda ho deen siyasat se to reh jaa tee hay changayzee” (Politics devoid of Faith degenerates into despotic barbarity).

    To those who do not find any arguement acceptable unless it is from the West, let me point out that England, a modern prosperous European state, has no separation of Church and state. The laws of Church of England are the laws of the land. And that has not stopped them from becoming one of the mightiest state and a great empire that once ruled the world.Recommend

  • Mazari baloch

    Interesting opinion expressed by the author.
    But about the 2 nation theory and a sovereign Muslim state my views are very much different;

    1- before the British empire the sub-continent was considered a Muslim land (majority land holders) as most of the rulers and Land owners were Muslims, but with the British gaining power and ground they managed to dominate and as a result Muslims were suppressed because of their International identity and strong history . The Muslim rule in Spain and the Rule of Ottomans were great examples for the British to believe that the Muslim power was able and capable to challenge the English rule in sub-continent. The Hindu rulers (mostly) by surrendering their loyalty to the British were able to progress socially and suppress the Muslim identity.
    At the time of 2 nation theory the British rule had strengthened and since sub-continent / united India was previously considered a Muslim Land, why would a sovereign state be demanded out of their own land ? Who would talk of leaving his own home when forcefully taken over. It was impossible to think of India without British rule specially at that time of history. Decisions were scenario based, the Muslims were in a weak position and divided and for the same reason Sir Syed A Khan tried to convince the British that hindus and muslims were different ideologies and had to be dealt separately unlike the british wanted its style of governance.

    2- 1800 onwards the dynamics were changing, 2 nation theory was the initial movement and the requirement of that time. How ever during Iqbal s and Quaid`s time the conditions were different and constantly changing. By then the Congress also demanded a united India minus the British. With a very critical scenario and in the best interest of the Muslims the demand for a separate homeland was made, If not, the congress would have made sure that the Muslim community be further humiliated. (Islamic teachings & practices were banned, which can never happen !) For the interest of the Muslims and Islam the great Nation got an identity ! ALLAH O AKBAR !Recommend

  • Parvez

    @Ahsan: Agree with you to an extent. The answer is more education, which leads to better education, which leads to progress.Recommend

  • http://India vasan

    Ali Tanoli : After reading your message, I agree that it is english’s fault that they taught you english. In a way, it is not their fault that nothing else from them was picked up, starting from good and less corrupt administration.
    It is not their fault that people like u didnt pick up even english, either.Recommend

  • Rex Minor

    Interesting article! Does the author know about the literacy rate among Indians before and after Moghuls? During whos time the first grand trunk road in the world was built in India and which of the Kings built the state sponsored social system for socialy week people, also the first in the world?

    Rex Minor Recommend

  • kaalchakra

    “So you feel more connected to history off Somalia than to history of India”

    Yuri, no, brother, that is not right. You misunderstood azhar bhai. Somalia or India is not the issue. One feels connected to the history of Muslims wherever they be.

    It is just a different way of thinking Recommend

  • John B

    @S. Zafar Iqbal:
    “The laws of Church of England are the laws of the land.”

    Please do not propagate false knowledge. The English law, which was based on common law and customs of the time of Europe which had a long history of written law, and experience in theocracy and in republic, and took progressive move to modern times since the signing of Magna Carta. It is nearly about two thousand years of experiments in law.Recommend

  • gp65

    I have a lot of respect for you. Many times your opinions are exactly opposite to mine given that we have different nationalities. But whatever your opinions, they are always backed by reasoning instead of being powered by blind anti-India or anti-Hindu hatred.

    I think Pakistan really needs many more people like you and faraz – patriotic, openminded and using their critical thinking skills.Recommend

  • gp65

    @azhar88: “oh and why do i feel connected with our collective muslim history rather than just the history of the suncontinet? simply because i put muslim brotherhood ahead of my nationalistic or regional connection. U have a problem with it?”

    Good to know. So you probably are concerned about how the Bengali Muslims were treated by your army since the Muslim ummah is more important to you than your nationalistic concerns. You probably are also actively demonstrating against the massacre of Shias that is going on in your country – due to your concern for ALL Muslims? Are you also against the fact that Pakistani army assists the Sultan of Bahrain in oppressing Bahraini Shias?

    How much do you know about Nigerian, Sudanese and Indonesian history by the way?Recommend

  • gp65

    @Rex Minor:
    Indians are well aware of the Mughal history as well as Sher Shah Suri’s contribution. We own ALL our history whether Mughal, Rajput, Buddhist or Sikh.

    It is many (not all ) Pakistanis that own only the Muslim aspects of Indian history and also claim to own the history of Arabs and Persians though they have no Arab ancestry.Recommend

  • abhi

    @rex minor
    any indian kid would have spend 5-6 years roting the name of all mughal kings, there is not really any part of that history which a pakistani knows and indian do not know. Your ranting is useless.Recommend

  • CM

    You sir fail at history. The Quaid didn’t ask for a separate Muslim Homeland till the 1930s. And the first time Pakistan was even mentioned at all was in 1940. However Jinnah was a member of Congress since the late 1910s. After World War 1 if I recall correctly. Attempting to rewrite history doesn’t change reality.Recommend

  • Shaikh PhD

    Go to a museum look at the paintings miniatures of the ruling Mungal classes. You can do the same for Iran for the same time period. Do the ruling class look like locals ? Do they look like Pakistanis ? Do they look like Iranians ? No. They have eastern faces oriental faces. Slit shaped eyes. High cheek bones. They look a hybrid form of orientals basically central asian features. Both Iran and India were conquered by Turkic/Mongol like people. It should be clear to anyone who is not brain washed.Recommend

  • Cynical


    Thanks a lot.Wish you all the best.Recommend

  • abhi

    @mazai baloch
    what an eye opener!Recommend

  • Noise

    No one ever mentions Subhas Chandra Bose. Even the author didn’t mention him. He was the one who really rocked the british boat in India and India and Pakistan owe a lot to him.Recommend

  • S. Zafar Iqbal

    Wells, I would rather rely on and believe the Archbishop of Canterbury than you in matters of religion and the law of England.

    May I refer you to the Most Reverend Rowan Williams the Archbishop of Canterbury ‘s speech that he delivered in February of 2008, in which he noted that “the law of the Church of England is the law of the land”.

    Source: Dr. Noah Feldman’s (Harvard Law Professor) New York Times Op-ed article dated March 16, 2008. Link to the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&co=C019201&ref=magazine.html&adxnnlx=1320816628-FERc9SnN3oRwUgNaGYnKVw

    For your information: there is no “separation of church and state” in the English constitutional order. The religious laws based on Christianity are embodied in the English legal system. The English Common Law, over the centuries, has integrated legal decisions taken at the ecclesiastical courts that once handled the family related legal cases. These are very much part of the English Common Law.

    And to this day the British monarch is the head of the Church of England, formally known as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England “which signifies their titular leadership over the Church of England”.
    I rest my case.Recommend

  • 1984

    Just a small doubt….

    I can understand that Bhagat Singh,Rani of Jhansi were not mentioned in Pakistani textbook…

    Can I know if Asfaqullah khan, whose organization eventually became Hindustan Republican Movement is ever mentioned in your textbooks???

    Or is he ignored because he’s a close friend of kafir called Ram Bismil…Recommend

  • sandra sebastian(goa)

    @Rex Minor:

    instead of the author ,why dont you do some research on the literacy rates of indians or hindus before the barbarians invaded and destroyed the old universities and seats of learning.why not read a bit more about the ancient system of healing , mathematics,arts,music etc.also read about the people and their way of life under the indus valley civilization.

    so much so that your arab brothers who you so like to fantasize about and would love to be like one were just mere traders who came to my land and took its knowledge to the world….the stark contrast between the traditions of learning and knowledge between an indian or rather hindu and the arabs is quite evident to this day….we dont gloat about the vakue of education quoted in our scriptures but our actions prove that indians or rather ancient hindus had a strong culture of learning and acquiring knowledge…no wonder india is turning out to be a knowledge hub of the world and indians or hindus everywhere are doing well…not slitting others throats but adding value to the respective economies they live in…..ah while typing this ,i am reading some news about 4 american indian kids who topped the spelling bee tests in america and another news about an indian kid who topped the national geographic bee test where president obama himself asked via teleconference….kudos to the hindu parents who instilll a strong values of education to their kids…Recommend

  • S. Zafar Iqbal

    @sandra sebastian(goa):
    Your points are well taken; specifically, about the veneration of knowledge in the Indian (Hindu) culture and the educational achievements of Indians.

    Obviously, we Pakistanis have a lot to learn from Indians, but unfortunately, that is not happening, at least not where it counts, i.e., in the fields of liberal arts, science and technology. All we seem to be after is what the Bombay movies and entertainment industry offer as culture, which our media moguls and assorted cultural trend-setters blindly embrace as their cultural panacea. They consider their mindless aping of Bombay “filmi” culture as their highest intellectual achievement; for they seem to be incapable of perceiving any reality, or truth, or knowledge beyond what they can lap up from the Bombay “filmi” culture.

    I wish we could emulate Indians in education, science and technology, and enrich our minds and culture by drawing from the treasure trove of ancient Indian wisdom and modern Indian achievements.

    As your neighbor and well wisher we congratulate you on your achievements. Well done.Recommend

  • http://India vasan

    Sandra Sebastian : If I may add to your post, the value of education and learning by analysis hardwork and intution of the ancient India was throughly obliterated by the Macaulay system brought in by the British to tame and enslave the Indian mindset. It will take a few more generations to come out of it and then Indian knowledge and ethos will contribute to the science like never before.Recommend

  • S. Zafar Iqbal


    It is interesting that you mention Macaulay. It reminds me of an article on this subject, by one Suprio Chaudhuri, an Indian. According to Chaudhuri’s research Macaulay is wrongly blamed for such policies.
    The following is link to the article :


  • ss

    Nicely written, however i disagree with the part – “This happened because the wealthy (and to some extent royal) Muslims of the sub-continent felt somehow superior to the Hindus. In their minds they were the rulers and not peasants and the thought of living under a Hindu led country, after independence, would be an insult. So they devised a plan to build a country for their own benefit, where they can still be the rulers and suck the blood out of the poor.”

    if i am given another chance i would still choose Pakistan over India, even though i belong to middle classRecommend

  • http://tradersutra.com hariharmani

    Tanoli saheb,keep writing,you make my day.Recommend

  • http://tradersutra.com hariharmani

    @S. Zafar Iqbal: You all right?I pinch myself,am I awake?Recommend

  • http://tradersutra.com hariharmani

    @vasan: Don’t be too cocky?The last really great contribution,which the ancient India gave to the world,which we Indians have most benefited was &is, a good blullack-cart.It is a reliable vehicle,needs no petrol.Have you tried?,you may fall in love.No kidding.Little grass,that is why we still use it for last 5000 years,both Ramayana and Mahabaratha confirms that.That ought to take some starch out of us,or instill some much needed pride.You choose your poison.Recommend

  • Ali Baloch

    too much stuff to know but no conclusion at all, about who we are and who we were, every one is confused and got his own version of historical data…. whats our true History then? A country to preach Islam was formed accidentally from residues of British Empire !Recommend

  • Gullible Nomore

    @Ali Baloch:
    “A country to preach Islam” REALLY??? I thought i had heard all other ideas like a country where all minorities will live free, or country for muslims. But now a new idea has been tossed in the mix. A country to PREACH islam! Zindabad sir Zindabad!Recommend