politics of madrasa survey

TeaHe Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to conduct a survey of madrassas has expressed serious concern not only over the fate of these institutions but also over the future of the Muslim identity. other BJP ruled states also expressed concern about madrassas, In May, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had said that the word ‘madrasa’ should cease to exist. In September, Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhammi said that his state would also survey madrasas like Uttar Pradesh. The reason stated is to check the availability of basic facilities for the students. Responding to this, Maulana Arshad Madani, the head of Darul Uloom Deoband, Appealed to Ulemas in charge of various madrasas to cooperate in the surveyTaking the stated logic of the regime at face value.

In politics, the logic of governance has always been a useful tool for achieving ideological objectives. This was the case in the 1905 Partition of Bengal and, as some might argue, during the 2014 general election campaign. The ideological aspect of this survey will be clear only after the completion of the survey and the various political parties reacting to its results. What aspects of majoritarianism inspired the survey? Is the survey motivated by prejudice towards Muslims? Whatever the answer, madrassas have become a new battlefield between the Hindu right wing and Indian Muslims, and the survey has the potential to present material that could shape Muslim identity.

Opinions about Madrasas

Two arguments are often given about madrasas in India. The first is that Muslims are economically backward because most of them are educated in madrassas. The second argument is that madrasas are nurseries of radical Islam. The idea gained momentum globally after the 9/11 attacks. The response of the Western states or the War on Terror was prepared on the basis of this logic. Despite the fact that al-Qaeda failed to attract Indian Muslims, the Indian political class was influenced by this approach to madrassas. The most surprising endorsement of this idea was by former West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee in 2002.

The Sachar Committee Report (2006) debunked both these arguments with strong empirical evidence. It found that only 3% of Muslim children of school-going age attend madrassas nationally. It also differentiated between madrasas and maqtabs. Maktabs are neighborhood schools, often associated with mosques. They provide religious education to children who go to other schools to get mainstream education. The report states that the share of Muslims attending madrassas and maqtabs does not exceed 6.3%. The most important observation of the report was that Muslims are aspirational. Muslim parents are eager to see their children enrolled in modern educational institutions, but often fail to do so due to their poor financial condition. The report therefore recommended that Muslim students be given scholarships so that they do not drop out. It was also implemented by some BJP ruled states like Madhya Pradesh but not by the then Gujarat government. Some researchers maintain that such scholarship has made a difference, although scholars have expressed concern over the lack of commitment from various national governments, including the United Progressive Alliance governments, which helped to prepare the report in implementing the committee’s recommendations. .

A policy for Muslims

It is clear that the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Assam or Uttarakhand have little appreciation for these findings. A BJP leader dismissed the Sachar report as an act of appeasement. Curiously, the authors of the Sachar Committee report deliberately chose to refrain from discussing issues of party politics or secularism or communalism and its implications for the welfare of Muslims. He pretended that there was no causal relationship between ideology and development. The politics that is expected after the madrassa survey will highlight just how important this relationship is, and the authors of the Sachar report were in the hope that they would formulate a policy for Muslims outside the framework of secularism and communalism. can.

Madrasas have a long and complicated history. In the post-rebellion period, they emerged primarily to help protect Muslim identity in the face of increasing colonial interventions, which they suspected might impose Christian values ​​on fellow Muslims. Madrasas, particularly Deobands, chose not to seek state support because they suspected that the colonial state, among others, would eventually expect them to produce “subjects loyal to the British Crown” as in the case of Aligarh Muslim University. happened. Therefore, they demanded autonomy. Deoband took a political stand and fiercely opposed the partition. While there are issues related to madrassas and modernity, especially with regard to issues such as patriarchy and child rights, some of which were raised by the Sachar Committee, any state intervention inspired by Islamophobic views would only help deepen majoritarianism. .