Madrasahs in Pakistan [untill: 2005]

3- State And Madrasah Relations: 1947-1999

As the previous chapter revealed, the dichotomy in the educational system was inherited by Pakistan from colonial India. The religiousmadaris were in the hands of conservativeulema who suspected the introduction of reforms in any sector by the modernist leadership as a conspiracy against Islam. Therefore, partly as a lack of commitment of the government and, partly, because of the fear of opposition from the conservativeulema, the government could not undertake comprehensive measures to introduce a uniform system of education in the country.

However, the efforts to introduce reforms in thedin-i-madaris have been underway since Ayub Khan’s regime. These efforts could not produce fruitful results because of multiple socio-political reasons.[^126]

Madrasahs under Ayub Khan’s Regime

The first-ever attempt to integratedin-i-madaris into the formal educational system and to get their financial and administrative control was made in 1961 through an ordinance to transfer the private endowments to the state. Thesewaqf endowments were the main source of finance ofdin-i-madaris .[^127]

In 1961 a committee for revision of the curricula of theDin-i-madras was formed for the first time. It consisted of eleven members in whom only three members represented the traditionaldin-i-madras while six were from universities and two were government representatives.[^128] The composition of the committee indicates the government move to bring about state sponsored reforms. The committee’s proposals for the reforms of curricula also reflected this trend. The committee report covered 700din-i-madaris in whichDars-i-Nizami was taught and was financed by the Asia Foundation, an American NGO.[^129]

The committee report of 1962 suggests that general educational subjects should be introduced indin-i-madaris along with traditional religious subjects to meet the challenges of the time. Active support of the clergy was sought to realize this objective.[^130] It was made clear that this would be possible only if certain unnecessary non-religious subjects be replaced by subjects based upon undisputed sources of knowledge.[^131] The committee agreed to introduce modern subjects to prepare students for different professions. The National Education Commission 1959 had already recommended these proposals.[^132] The government intended to modernize the system of education reforming themaktabs andmadaris . Under this scheme the primary education as approved by the department of education was to be compulsory for all the students of affiliatedmadaris. [^133] It is to be noted that the sphere of reform in the syllabus was limited to the non-religious subjects as taught inmadaris. The report recommended that logic and philosophy be cut down which were considered essential for the religious study in the past and formed part ofDars-i-Nizami. [^134] Great emphasis was given to Quranic studies,hadith, and early Islamic history.

Table 3.1 Proposals and Changes of the Committee of 1960/61

Sources: Based on the Report of Committee set up by the Governor of West Pakistan for recommending improved syllabus for the various Dar-ul-Ulooms and ArabicMadrasahs in West Pakistan, in Malik, Jamal,Colonization of Islam , 1996.

The changes in syllabus were aimed at reforming a system geared more towards an effective and realistic education which would limit theDars-i-Nizami , fade out non- religious subjects and extend courses to ten years preceded by five years of primary education.[^135] The term non-religious remained disputed between the modernists and the clergy.[^136] The proposed scheme made more space for new subjects aimed at bringing about basic changes in religious education. The suggestion for introduction of English, Urdu, mathematics, sports, and social sciences points towards this objective.[^137] The proposed curricular changes were justified for different reasons. Learning of English was considered essential for handling modern life and for the mission of Islam. The introduction of mathematics was justified for understanding all modern sciences. The recommendation of Urdu as medium of instruction at secondary level was justified on the basis that ordinary people can understand it easily. The elimination of logic and medieval philosophy was explained by its non-essential character for religious education.[^138] In order to supervise the working ofdin-i-madaris a directorate of religious education was proposed to be established within theAuquaf Department. It was to monitor and evaluate the standard of work of teachers and students.[^139] Special six months re-orientation courses were to be arranged for the teachers ofdin-i-madaris in order to equip them for learning new subjects.

The report of 1962 explains that it refers to religious learning (deeni uloom ) and non-religious learning (dunyavi uloom) only as a convenient expression and not to convey the impression that they are opposite to each other. Yet repeated reference to “basic Islamic studies” as strictly religious subjects and the need to expunge un- necessary non-religious subjects from the existing syllabus contradict the earlier explanation.[^140] The report did not propose to abolish the dichotomy between religious and non-religious rather reinforced it. The reforms meant only the replacement of non-essential, non-religious disciplines by essential non-religious ones.[^141] The terms non-essential, non-religious, however, remained disputed between the modernists and traditionalulema .. For the modernists only the undisputed sources were the religious in the true sense, but for theulema not just those sources but a broad spectrum of texts, techniques and sciences that collectively in their evolution cumulatively comprise the heritage with references to which they define themselves were considered essential for religious education.[^142]

The report of 1962 begins by characterizing Islam as an all encompassing religion which it takes to mean that religious education ought to cover all aspects of human life. This contrasted the earlier claim of defining and restricting the sphere of religion.[^143] As there was no dispute over the claim that Islam regulates all aspects of life, therefore, it provides strong justification for the reforms of themadrasah : for reforms alone would enable theulema to better participate in modern life, to play an active role in matters of the world, as Isalm itself enjoins upon them. These realities not only necessitated the introduction of modern disciplines inmadrasahs but the integration ofmadrasah themselves into the general education system.[^144]

The overall response to the proposal of report was not satisfactory as the clergy except Abul Ala Mawdudi took it as a conspiracy by government to weaken their sphere of influence.[^145]

Madrasahs under Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto:

With the overwhelming victory of secular forces in the election of 1970, the clergy was sidelined for sometime.[^146] The nationalization policy of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was also extended to the educational sector. To counter this move theTanzim ul Madaris-al Arabiyyah was reorganized in 1974, thoughdin-i-madarris were not nationalized at first. However, the constitution of 1973 made many concessions to the clergy almost to their satisfaction.[^147] On the directive of the government the Council of Islamic Ideology prepared a comprehensive report on the future Islamic character of education in 1975/76.

The report of the sub-committee on the Islamic system of education appointed by the Council of Islamic Ideology recommended the integration of general education withmadrasah education by introducing the study of theHoly Qur’an and teaching of Islam in the curriculum of institutions of general education. On the other hand, modern subjects were proposed to be included in the curriculum ofmadrasahs. [^148] The sub-committee also proposed the establishment of amadrasah education board. The certificates and degrees issued by this board were to be officially recognized. General science, mathematics and social sciences were proposed to be included in the curriculum of themadrasah after the primary level. It was suggested that themadrasah education board should be completely sovereign.Madrasahs should be allowed to run on public financial support and the expenditure of the board should be borne by the affiliatedmadarassas .[^149] The overall character of this report reveals that it was aiming at Islamization of general education more than reformingmadrasah education.[^150]

Towards the end of the Z. A. Bhutto era, the University Grants Commission (UGC) recognized the higher degrees ofdin-i-madaris . The National assembly put the certificate (sanads ) ofWifaqul Madaris al Arabia on the same level as an M.A degree inIslamiyat provided the student could qualify for B.A in English. The leaders ofmadaris could not agree to this condition.[^151] The recognition of certificates ofdin-i-madaris was aimed at playing an effective role by graduates ofmadaris in the field of education. All of the universities did not recognize the equivalence. Therefore, graduates ofmadaris faced difficulties for admission to universities.

Madrasahs under Zia-ul-Haq

General Zia-ul-Haq took power in July 1977 as a result of Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) Movement against the Bhutto government. The PNA movement had derived great strength from thedin-i-madaris and the mosques. Since Zia-ul-Haq was convinced that the clergy could play a crucial role in the political affairs of the country, he wanted to establish close relationship with the clergy and thedin-i-madaris . This strategy proved crucial for his prolonged stay in power.

The Sargodha Report

On 2nd September 1978, Zia-ul-Haq ordered the Ministry of Religious Affairs to prepare a comprehensive report ofdin-i-madaris in Sargodha District. After three weeks the report was presented to the president which was known as the Sargodha Report.[^152] The report contains a historical introduction and profile ofdin-i-madaris in Sargodha. The DM education is reported to be spread over 9-10 years, subdivided into following three phases.

Preparatory stage                3 years

Intermediate stage              2-3 years

Final stage                          4 years

It is stated that, after the examination of formal primary education, students are sent tomadrasah where they learn to read Arabic and Persian. However, they are not taught how to write.[^153] It was reported that the owners ofmadaris are responsible for collecting donations. The staff is ill paid with no security of service. The students mostly belong to poor families from rural areas.[^154] The report identified the following sources of income of DMs:

Alms collections during Muslim festivities, such asids, income from properties (shops, houses, agriculture land, endowments, and income from adjacent shrines).[^155] There followed a number of proposals about how to improve the finances of the DMs and their curricula.

The report reveals that the problems of these institutions related to the proprietary rights over lands on which they are situated, grants of scholarships to the students and teachers for higher education and recognition of theirsanads ( certificates) for the purpose of obtaining jobs in civil services. The committee also recommended that the government should not deprivedin-i-madrasahs of their autonomous status.[^156]

The reforms in curriculum were sought by introducing science and technology to integrate thedin-i-madaris into formal system of education. The first step towards this objective would be the establishment of All Pakistan Education Advisory Board in order to report on the DMs.[^157] For higher education (M.A and M.Phil) a federalUlema Academy or University was to be established and the system of examination standardized.[^158] The Sargodha Report proved the first step towards further developments in this sector and helped government to identify the areas of special interests. The Ministry of Religious Affairs had already informed the president that efforts to unitemadaris of all schools of thought under a single organization had failed in the past. The strongest opposition to this policy came fromWafaq-ul-Madaris al Arabiya. [^159]

The overall analysis of the Sargodha Report suggests that some of theulema were in favor of reforms in themadaris and that they had expressed their dissatisfaction over the prevailing situation[^160] . TheDeobondi were, however, the only group who strongly favored the status quo. This led to the failure of the reform program withinmadaris. The awareness regarding the need of reforms withinmadaris was helpful for the government to proceed with this program in 1979, when the National Committee forDin-i-Madaris was established in Islamabad on January 17, 1979. This was aimed at drawing up proposals with reference to the Sargodha Report with the purpose of extending the scope ofmadaris to transform them into an integral part of formal education.[^161]

The committee had 27 members of which 15 were traditionalulema and, therefore, was considered a legitimate body, acceptable both to the clergy and the government at the same time. This committee was headed by Dr A.W. J. Halepota, then Director of IRI (Islamic Research Institute) and former member of CII (Council of Islamic Ideology). The recommendation made by this committee is known as the Halepota Report.

The Halepota Report

The comprehensive report expressed dissatisfaction at the overall situation ofdin-i-madaris in Pakistan. According to the report both the quality of education and the financial position of DMs are lamentable.[^162] The curricula and system of examination lacked uniformity and were not meeting the needs of the nation and that of the modern age. The report recommended concrete and feasible measures to improve the overall situation indin-i-madaris to bring them in accordance to modern needs. Expanding higher education and employment opportunities for the students ofdin-i-madaris by integrating them into overall educational system in the country.[^163] The committee, however, admitted thatdin-i-madaris were the transmitter of cultural heritage of the society and that the student could boast of a motivation for learning not known within formal educational system. It was also proposed that DM should receive aid through governmental institutions.[^164]

For the integration of both systems of education the committee proposed that modern subjects should be added to theDars-i-Nizami . For this purpose Urdu, mathematics, social science and general science should be introduced at the primary level. In the secondary stage general mathematics, general science, Pakistan studies and English should be included. At the graduation level two subjects from economics, political science and English should be introduced. It was suggested that one-third duration should be allowed for the instruction of modern subjects.[^165] In order to bring uniformity between the two streams of education at higher level, comparative religious sciences were to be offered as optional subjects while History, Islamic economy, and Islam and politics would be compulsory.

The following scheme of studies was proposed:

(A) Darja Ibtidaya                    (primary): five years

*       Darja Muatawisita*             (middle): three years

*       Darja Thaniya Aama*         (secondary):                     two years

*       Darja Thaniya Khassa*       (higher secondary):          two years

Darja Aaliya                              ( graduation): two years

*Darja Takhasus            * (post graduation):             two years

(B) Tajwid wa Qir'at          institution of artistic recitation of Qur’an,

(Matric): five years duration.

(C)*  Deeni Ta'lim Barai khawateen* : Religious education for woman (Matric):  five years duration

The representatives of the four schools of thought agreed to introduce modern subjects in all the above mentioned categories of religious educational institutions.[^166]

The committee further proposed the establishment of a National Institute ofdin-i-madaris for better coordination among the organization of different schools of thought. This institute would be responsible for conducting examinations ofmadrasahs up to M.A level, publishing results to award certificates and to compile curricula as well as to revise them. This institute would also be responsible for the welfare ofmadaris, teachers and the students.[^167] Balanced representation of all schools of thought and government representatives would be ensured in the proposed institution.

In order to make the system of examination effective the committee proposed to hold final examinations. The proposed National Institute for ReligiousMadaris would conduct the final examinations. This would help to integrate religious institutions and enable their students to compete for jobs with students of formal educational institutions.[^168] It was stated that at the end of each stage of religious education an external examination would be conducted by the National Institute of ReligiousMadaris .[^169] Due to the absence of any rule relating to the equivalence of degrees awarded by religious institutions and those of mainstream educational institutions, the degree holders ofdin-i-madaris faced great difficulties in finding jobs in government departments. In order to overcome this problem the committee proposed the equivalence of certificates of different stages of religious educational institutions with those of formal educational certificates.[^170]

Equivalence of the certificates awarded by Din-i-Madaris and formal education is as follows:[^171]

Darja (stage)                                  Sanad (certificate) Equivalence

Darja Ibtidaya                    Shadat ul Ibtidaya Primary

Darja Muttawasita             Shahadat ul Muttawasita Middle

*Darja Thanviya amah                                Shahadat ul Thanviya amah                 * Matric

*Darja Thanviya khassa      Shahadat ul Thanviya Khassa             * F.A

Darja  Aaliya                                  Shahadat ul Aaliya B.A (Bachelor)

Darja Takhasus                  Shahadat ul Takhasus M.A (Master)

During the national survey it was revealed that mostdin-i-madaris lacked basic facilities, i.e. proper buildings, furniture, teaching aids and libraries. The teachers of DMs were found to be the lowest paid as compared to teachers of government education department. In order to improve the financial situation ofdin-i-madaris the government was also asked to ensure the supply of water, gas, and electricity on priority basis. Future housing schemes were to include the construction of DMs. They were to be provided with furniture, books, teaching and writing equipment. Similar to college and universities book banks would be established with the help of the National Book Foundation. Libraries of DM would be supported by the government.[^172] The DMs under the umbrella of National Institute for DMs would not have to pay income tax and the financial aid to those DMs should be provided unconditionally. The financial aid is to be provided from Zakat funds.

Measures for the betterment of teacher’s economic and social conditions were proposed. The discrimination against teachers and students of DMs in public employment was to be reduced and they were to be helped to establish themselves economically. The students of DMs were also to be enabled to get better educational and employment opportunities. DM student should be provided with scholarships for higher studies at home as well as abroad. Government should enhance employment opportunities in the state run institutions.[^173] However, it was not thoroughly probed how employment opportunities could be created for such a large scale production of students by DMs.

Neither the report of 1962 nor that of 1979 proposed thatmadrasahs should cease to exist. But both recommended that religious education be somewhat brought within and be regulated by concerns similar to those of the general stream of state sponsored education. However, the extent of expanding the sphere of modern subjects so that it become indistinguishable from other areas of life and delimiting the influence of clergy through DMs seemed unacceptable to religious elites. Even the many conditions attached to the provision of incentives for agreeing with the reform package were a challenge to their autonomy.[^174]

Reaction of the Din-i-Madaris

At first, the report was received positively among theulema and it was termed the first step towards the unification of different types of education which was the need of the time.[^175] Later on, the situation changed and opposition came from theulema of different schools of thought. Sometimes theulema of the same school of thought differ in their reactions to the reform package. However, the most fervent opposition came from the Deobandi. An important representative of Deoband, Mohammad Yousaf Ludhianwi, was a great critic of the reform committee. He termed the proposed reforms as a deep rooted conspiracy against the autonomy of DMs. He was of the view that modern education was aimed at destroying Muslim identity and culture, and the present initiative would not only destroy Islamic education but Islam itself.[^176] He believed that the reform committee was a representative of state power and promotes its interests.

Ludianwi argued thatmadrasahs were the defenders of religious sciences in society and their integration into formal educational system would prevent them from performing their purely religious services and subordinate them to worldly education. This opinion was, however, in sharp contrast to the concept that Islam characterizes a system encompassing life in its fullness: a major theme of theulema ’s religious discourse. His stand clearly vindicated that there is a separate and independent sphere of religion and its preservation would be ensured only through an independent and autonomous system ofmadrasahs . He warned the government of the worst reaction ever shown by DMs if it tried to proceed with the proposals of the reform committee. As far as the matter of financial aid was concerned, Ludlianwi believed that it was against the spirit of religious institutions and the ego ofulema to accept conditional aid from the rulers.[^177] He appealed to DMs to reject the proposals of the committee entirely, to show that gaining of certificates and titles was not the aim of theulema .

This was followed by a campaign against the proposals which had assumed an official character. The central organization of theWafaq-ul-Madaris expressed its disappointment with the proposals of the committee and refused to co-operate with its chairman. The Deobandi were the main source of strength behind this campaign as the main DMs in Pakistan were under the influence of religious families affiliated with the Deobandi school of thought[^178]

Maulana Mufti Mahmood, a leading Deobandialim and leader ofJamiat-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, who had mobilized masses against Bhutto during the 1977 agitation, opposed any state interference in the curricula of DMs. He declared the syllabus of the DMs to be perfect and comprehensive.[^179]

The opposition to the report of 1979 was basically the question of authority and identity of the traditional religious leaders. As the mixed curriculum could undermine this sectarian identity and reduce the unquestioned authority of the owners of DM, theulema could not agree to its implementation. The extent of opposition from different sects was proportionate to the stakes involved for them in the proposed scheme as the strongest opposition of the Deobandi school of thought indicates. The introduction of modern sciences was not acceptable because it is a threat to the separate identity of the religious sphere of education.[^180] That in post-independence India these apprehensions were expressed by DMs was quite natural. But the continued suspicion shown by theulema in Pakistan was astonishing as Muslim culture and identity were not at stake in a Muslim majority state.

It is universally understood that reform is the essence of every social order and Islam permits this by embodying the idea ofijtihad. Theulema, however, failed to execute this important notion to the benefit of Muslim community in any social sector, and the education sector is no exception in this regard. All those who resisted the reforms in DM argued that the experience in other countries was not encouraging asulema of eminence ceased to be produced there, whilemadrasahs in the Subcontinent produce distinguished scholars by adhering to the knowledge of the traditional religious sphere and resisting all forms of reforms. They think that the existence of the present system ofmadrasahs was necessary for the maintenance of religion in society.[^181]

The response to reform of many otherulema was more or less the same as that of Maulana Ludhianvi, and Maulana Mufti Mahmood. However, some of theulema had different opinions regarding the question of reforms. Maulana Mohammad Yousaf Banuri, the founder of theJamiat-ul-Ulum al Islamiya, Karachi, was of the view that many texts studied inmadarassa are sometimes barely intelligible. He held such texts to be obscure because they were written and introduced intomadrasahs during the period of Muslim intellectual decline in the late Middle Ages. Yet he did not mean to subvertmadrasahs rather to salvage them. He wrote that some of the texts conventionally used inmadrasahs ought to be replaced by simpler, clearer, and more authoritative texts. We do not want to do away with traditional sciences but seek only to create greater competence in them through the introduction of better books,[^182] said Banuri.

Banuri recognizes the need for the introduction of new subjects inmadrasahs too, but only in tandem with the strengthening and deepening of the religious sphere.

Mohammad Taqi Uthmani, Vice President of theDar-ul-Ulum Madarassa of Karachi, tends to a similar conclusion, though based on a naïve approach towards the history ofmadarassa education in the Subcontinent. He observes that theDars-i-nizami comprised religious and non-religious sciences in colonial India, and Muslim students graduating from this system of education were capable of fulfilling their responsibilities in every sphere of practical life. This system has an added feature of enabling a person to strengthen his religious belief and preparing a student for taking up modern sciences at the same time.[^183]

He, however, showed willingness to adapt to change by incorporating Western sciences and philosophy under Muslim rule. He contended that the strong opposition of theulema to this idea in the past was based on the perceived policy of British colonialism of destroying their religion in the Subcontinent carried out in the name of reforms.[^184] Yet Uthmani consideredmadrasahs as purely religious institutions which can guarantee the preservation of religion in society. As far as the process of integration was concerned, he believed that mainstream institutions need reforms as well to establish their Islamic character, and, until the achievement of this objective, integration would be meaningless. As far as the introduction of modern subjects was concerned he believed that such incorporation should not affect the purely religious character ofmadrasah education.[^185]

Although the extent and substance of reaction vary among different groups ofulema and sometimes among differentulema of the same group, the element of distrust and lack of confidence was common among all theulema regarding the government initiatives the essence of which was deeply rooted in the colonial era.

In the prevailing situation the Ministry of Education on March 15, 1981 insisted to arrange a meeting with theulema purely in the interest of the nation. Dr Halepota confirmed that DMs were not to be nationalized and that they were only to obtain financial support and that their graduates would receive equal treatment.[^186]

On April 19, 1981 the Ministry of Religious Affairs which had borne the cost for the DM committee wrote to the Islamic Research Institute whose director was the chairman of the committee:

Since theulema themselves do not want that Government should take any initiative in this behalf and since the Government’s intentions have been suspected quite unjustifiably, no further action will be taken in this behalf, at least for the time being.

According to Dr. Halepota, Zia-ul-Haq, while expressing regret to committee members later on, complained about the non-cooperation of theulema. [^187]

Din-i-madaris Comprehensive Report 1988

The National Education Policy 1976 had proposed that the state of education in Pakistan should be improved. Therefore, a comprehensive survey ofdin-i-madaris was conducted in the country. In the light of this survey a comprehensive report ofdin-i-madaris was prepared by the committee established for this purpose in 1988.[^188] The committee agreed that the funds provided to the DMs were not sufficient for their needs. Therefore, financial aid should be provided to the DMs to improve their performance. The consent of DMs must be secured for this purpose. The committee proposed the following measures for reforming the DMs in Pakistan.

As a tradition the students of DMs belong to the poor segment of the society. The well-off people usually do not study in the DMs. The lack of employment opportunities and lower social status of DMs students are responsible for this situation. Therefore, DM education should be made attractive by providing various incentives to the DM students.

During the survey an overwhelming majority of theMuntazemeen of DMs agreed to the changes in the curriculum, though it was not expected earlier. The committee concluded that changes in the syllabus of the DMs should be introduced to bring it in accordance with changing needs, if uniform educational system was not possible at the moment. Thus, a comprehensive study was made to ascertain the extent of changes to be introduced in the existing curriculum.

The report of 1988 also proposed changes in the curriculum of the formal education system. The committee was of the view that the people produced by the formal education sector are usually deficient in knowledge on the basis of which Pakistan came into being. This objective can be achieved by reviewing the books of all subjects and should be based on the Islamic concept of knowledge. In order to enhance the knowledge of the students regarding Islam, the syllabus ofIslamiat from primary to graduation level should be reviewed so that repetition may be avoided and each stage may prove a source of new information for the readers. It was noted that the text books ofIslamiat from primary to graduation level lacked continuity.

Examination has a vital importance in education. Therefore, an effective examination system can improve the efficiency of educational institutions. It was revealed during the survey that most of theMuntazemeen of DMs agreed to affiliate with the proposed board of DMs. Therefore, an effective representation ofulema in this board must be insured. The proposed board should have branches in all the four provinces and Azad Kashmir so that an effective coordination between the board and DMs may be maintained.

The committee for DMs came to the conclusion that the teachers of DMs were facing financial hardships especially in old age. The committee therefore recommended that the government create funds for the financial support of the teachers of DMs so that they could lead an honorable life. Medical expenses of those teachers and their spouses should be borne by the government. The teachers of DMs should be sent for training ofHujjaj so that they should have more exposure as well as the chance of performing theHaj (pilgrimage). Special training for primary level teachers may be arranged and the participants may be given special allowances. Salaries of teachers may also be raised. In the housing schemes a share for the DMs teachers should be earmarked. Scholarships should be allowed to the DMs students and they should be encouraged for foreign study on the same lines as those of the formal educational institutions. Efforts should be made to get the help of Arab countries in this regard.[^189]

The Din-i-madaris Regulation

Due to the resistance of the DMs Zia-ul-Haq was forced to postpone for the time being the reform of DMs as proposed by Dr. Halepota. ADin-i-madaris Regulation was introduced with immediate effect. It projected an assimilation of the two systems while conserving the autonomy of the DMs. At present a National Institute ofDin-i-madaris Pakistan (N I D M P) was to be established with two chambers.[^190]

The syndicate was to consist of theulema’ s representatives, of the ministries and of institutions of education as well as of the provincial governments. Out of 22 members 12 were to beulema pertaining to different schools of thought. The task of the syndicate included the supervision of the DMs attached to the NIDMP. Furthermore, it was to be responsible for improving the qualifications of the teachers, conduct examination at the higher and intermediate stage, lay down conditions for affiliation to the NIDMP, conduct admission tests, issue certificates, levy and collect contributions, administer the funds of the institute (NIDMP), present the annual budget, and take care of any other administrative matters. The second chamber was the Academic Council comprising 32 members with 20ulema and 12 administrative experts and academicians. Its task was to advise the syndicate in all matters of scientific and pedagogical nature, with special emphases on matters of curricula and examinations. The chairman of the NIDMP had a unique position by having the chairmanship of both chambers. Only the president could substitute for him. The President of Pakistan was the ultimate authority and the chairman was responsible to him. The working languages of the institute were to be Urdu and Arabic. The institute was to be financed from different sources: contributions of the DMs, grants-in-aid by the state, and by different institutions, scholarships,awqaf funds and other sources.[^191]

Recognition of sanads of DMs

The government efforts to pacify the clergy continued despite the previous failed efforts of integrating traditional religious institutions. An attempt to integrate the clergy through recognizing the certificates of DM was another step in this direction. During the Bhutto era such an attempt had failed because of disagreement between UGC (University Grants Commission) and the universities regarding this issue.

To take up this issue once again the UGC committee for the equal status of DM certificates was established in 1980. Its proposals were finally implemented an April 16, 1981.[^192]   TheFawqaniyya h certificate of Islamiyat and Arabic was to be recognized by colleges and universities on condition that the graduates of DM would have successfully passed two more subjects which were compulsory for the B.A. examination. This was the revival of the proposal made in 1976 on the equivalence of degree. Later on, it was decided that for teachers of Arabic and Islamic studies, parity of status with M.A in these subjects should be given to theShahadat ul Fazila Sanad ofwafaq-ul-madaris (Deoband), theShahadatul Faragha ofTanzimul Madaris (Barelvi ) as well as to the final certificates of the two other schools of thought, theShia andAhl-e-Hadith. [^193]

Besides the formal recognition of their graduates the government wanted to provide financial support to DMs because of their bad financial position. It was proposed that financial support should be provided from thezakat fund aszakat regulation had already declared DM students eligible for the receipt ofzakat. The CII supported the criteria of thezakat regulation. It was, however, made clear that only the DM student would be eligible for receipt of financial support and no one else. To ascertain the other conditions for the receipt ofzakat a 12 member committee was nominated by provincialzakat administration. Others details were finalized by this committee.[^194]

Reaction of Clergy and Din-i-madaris to the Official Policies

Since the proposal of the DM committee of 1979 was not received well by the DeobandiWafaq ul Madaris, they successfully campaigned to win over other schools of thought. They presented alternative curricula to that of the DM committee comprising of 16 instead of usual of eight years of instruction in accordance with the proposals of the National Committee forDin-i-madaris, while the curriculum committee of the Halepota Report had proposed a subdivision in four levels similar to the formal education system (primary, Matric, B.A and M.A level, middle and F.A having been dropped).

TheWafaq and theTanzim preferred a stricter subdivision into six levels. The religious scholars thus wanted to adapt their system of education primarily to the colonial system of education. The English denominations of the certificates received an Arabic nomenclature in DM system thus opening the possibility of putting the formal secular aspects of the DM curricula on a religious, traditional level. In the course of instruction ofWafaq ul Madaris some innovation were added to theDars-i-Nzami . The curricula nevertheless were essentially different from that proposed by the DM committee of 1979. It had been the aim of the National Committee forDin-i-madaris to integrate new disciplines into the traditional system of education ofmadaris . The classical traditional curriculum would thus be simultaneously modernized and legitimized in Islamic fundamentalist manner.[^195]

The enthusiasm of the members of the Halepota Report for integration was based on the concept of knowledge which had been presented by Islamic intellectuals in 1977 in Mecca in the first World Conference on Islamic Education. This points to their unquestioned belief in technology.[^196] The curriculum proposed by the DM committee was close to the one advocated by Abul Ala Mawdudi and supported by a small section of different schools of thought who favored modernization.

While the clergy by and large paid no heed to the proposal of the Halepota Report for the curricula at the primary level, the proposal for curricula of theWafaq at middle level (grades 6 to 10) actually included new subjects. The classical subjects ofDars-i-nizami were part of it only towards the end of this level. The studies of Islamic law were nevertheless still at the core of the curriculum in contrast to the proposals of NCDM, in which modern as well as classical subjects were compulsory. Still subjects such as English and Pakistan Studies and general science were not taken into consideration in the proposals of theWafaq , while economics, comparative religious sciences as well as communism and capitalism, social sciences and other new subjects were offered as optional subjects.[^197] After several interactions with the governmentWafaq-ul-Madaris agreed to some adjustments with the government proposals. A factor in this was also the fear of losing teachers as the previous years witnessed a brain drain away frommadaris to the formal institutions and to foreign countries. The decision in favor of a new curriculum was further facilitated by the prospects of official recognition and financial support by the government. The government accepted the sixteen years curriculum as it apparently fulfilled the conditions for a formal recognition. There was, however, no essential alteration of the classical DMs course of instruction. Theulema had been able to profit by this alteration, gaining official recognition. This showed the ability of theulema to meet the demands of innovation and pragmatism without acting against their own interest. With the new curriculum they gained influence, rather than losing it. They finally achieved formal recognition via these curricula, and, on this basis, were now able to influence the secular sector. The DMs thus evolved into alternatives to the secular, official, or commercial systems of education.

Table 21: Different Curricula at a Glance

Sources:

1a =Dars-i-nizami ; cf.Halepota Report , pp. 122, 135, 147-155.

1b = Curicullum of four years of theWafaq al-madaris al-arabiyyah ; cf.

*       Halepota Report* , ibid.

1c = Proposal of National Committee of Din-i-madaris, 1979; cf.

Halepota Report , ibid.

2   = Wafaq-proposel partly enacted in1983; cf.solah sala nisab-e-ta lim

(tajwiz), Multan, 1983,Waqaf al-madaris (manzurkardah 1).

3  = Waqaf-proposal as enacted in 1984, cf.solah sala nisab-e-ta lim , Multan,

Waqaf al-madaris (manzurkardah11 ).

4  = Tanzim-proposal, enacted in1983;cfsolah sala nisab-e ta`lim (manzur), Lahore, 1984, Tanzim al-madaris.

5.=Jama`at-e Islami: Cheh salah nisab fadil alim-e islami ‘Ulama ’ Akademi, Mansurah, Lahore, n.d.; exams are to be passed in “English”, “Pakistan Studies”, “Mathematics”, “General Science”, “Islamic History” and “Diniyat”.

Explanations:     0 = These subjects are to be taught after graduation (faraghat) in a special two years course (darajah-e takhassus); cfsolah sala nisab-eta`lim, Wafaq al-madaris al-arabiyah, Multan, 1984*(manzurkardah11* ), pp. 7ff. 21, 39.

1 =  Persian is a precondition for the course ofTanzim.

To evaluate the situation correctly it is important to note that Zia ul Haq, the bureaucracy, and theulema had different objective in the agenda of reforms. The president sought the acceptance of his leadership by theulema and thus Islamic legitimization of his rule. For the bureaucracy, formalization of DM served as a means to bring them under control and thus to neutralize them politically. Theulema, in contrast, were aimed at escaping their backwardness and achieving social recognition without giving up their tradition. On the other hand, the appeasement ofulema was a pragmatic move of Zia ul Haq who managed to isolate clergy from mainstream political parties during MRD Movement.[^198]

BarelviTanzim was relatively more easily ready for accepting the government agenda. The new curriculum of the Barelvi is characterized by the additional eight years phase put in front of the old curriculum. The innovations to the old curriculum are of no particular value. Mathematics, history and geography are listed but not specified as to their contents. The new subjects are said to cover only the classes up to grade 10. There are almost no alternations to the classical DM course of instruction. This is evident from a sentence contained in the curriculum of theTanzim in 1983.[^199]

A spectacular reaction of theulema and of the DM against the official measures of Islamization was the boycott of thezakat system. The most important point of controversy between the state and the clergy was the regulation that the institutions receivingzakat were to maintain an account on thezakat funds received and this bookkeeping was to be audited by thezakat administration. The bureaucracy would thus have information on the budgets of DM, theulema and ultimately of religious political parties. The auditing personnel were to be nominated by the chief administratorzakat . The Central zakat Administration (CZA) was actually demanding from theMohtamins *  proof that the fund had been spent according to the rules ofSharia* as understood by the Central zakat Administration (CZA). Reacting to this regulation the DMs affiliated to thewafaq ul madaris al Arabia refused to acceptzakat from PZC as along asmuftis did not agree on the compatibility of the new regulation with thesharia. [^200] Wafaq ul Madaris did not agree to some parts of thezakat regulation and, therefore, they refused to acceptzakat. [^201]

TheWafaq ul Madaris called upon all the DMs affiliated to it not to accept anyzakat funds from thezakat administration and even to return the amounts already received. Maulana Mufti Mahmood, a leadingDeosbandi alim had issued afatwa in this regard declaring whole officialzakat systems against theSharia . However, the appeal of boycott was not received unanimously because some the DM acceptedzakat .Jamia Ashrafiyyah, Lahore, was one of the largestDeobandi DMs which accepted officialzakat .

In contrast to the policy of theWafaq theBarelvi Tanzim not only accepted the officialzakat but asked for it without any precondition. TheTanzim rather asked for raisingzakat fund to the DMs and making the flow easy.[^202] Thus, whileDeobandi were still claimed to rejectzakat from centralzakat fund, theBarelvi proved to be main beneficiary from this system. BesidesBarelvi , theAhl-e-Hadith andJamaat-i-Islami were the main beneficiaries. Though theShia were ideologically against the prevailingzakat system, some of its DMs receivedzakat as well.[^203]

Madrasahs under Democracy, 1988-1999

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979) and the Iranian revolution (1979) brought far-reaching implications for the whole region and especially for Pakistan. The religious forces were most suited to be anti-Soviet forces because the war against Soviet occupation in 1979 was initiated in the name of Islam. General Zia-ul-Haq promotedSunni Islam in order to neutralize the influence ofShiism and to strengthenjihad in Afghanistan at the same time. The defeat of the Russian army in Afghanistan in 1989 was, therefore, considered to be the victory of Islam. This development had far reaching impacts on PakistaniSunni religious circles as they had provided active support to thejihadis. These forces started to visualize an Islamic revolution on the same lines in Pakistan. Meanwhile, the international community ceased to take further interest in the region after the Soviet withdrawal.

The instability in Afghanistan and the rising influence of religious extremists were the main challenges for the successive democratic governments in Pakistan from 1988 onwards.[^204] The main focus of the governments during this period remained on appeasement of the extremist religious forces rather than to contemplate their education system. The establishment of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan encouraged the clergy of Pakistan to demand Islamization of the society according to their interpretation of theSharia . Since the ruling Taliban in Afghanistan had studied in the DMs in Pakistan, therefore, the links between thesemadaris and the Taliban were further strengthened. With this, the element of militancy for the realization of religious objectives was incorporated into the minds of students of DMs.

The rise of the Islamic movements, theTehrik-i-Nifaz-e-Shariat-i- Mohammadi (TNSM) of Maulana Sufi Mohammad in Malakand Division (NWFP) in November 1994 and ofTanzeem-i-Ittehad-e-Ulam-i-Qabail (TIUQ) Khyber Agency (FATA) were initial manifestations of theulema assertion for political authority. This claim for political authority was justified on the perceived failure of government to deliver social justice and maintain law and order effectively.[^205] The TNSM in pursuit of its goals rallied thousands of supporters in May 1994. They demonstrated in Swat and blocked the Malakand Pass. In November of the same year another rebellion took place in Swat in which the TNSM activists paralyzed government institutions. In the ensuing violence government officials were made hostages and a PPP MPA was killed while resisting being taken prisoner. The movement spread to other parts of Malakand in several days. Under heavy pressure of the movement the NWFP(=Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) government announced the enforcement ofSharia in Malakand Division. According to theNifaz-e-Sharia Regulation 1994, session judges, civil judges and magistrates were renamed asZila Qazi ,Ilaqa Qazi andQazi Faujdari, respectively. However, normalcy could return to Swat only after a long spell of violence claiming dozens of lives and loss of property worth hundreds of millions.[^206] Soon after, the TNSM leadership questioned the credentials ofQazis appointed by the government for not fulfilling the requirements of theSharia . The mushroom growth of themadrasahs` s influence and the increasing number of F M radio stations run by local clerics is a post-1994 phenomena in Swat.[^207]

Parallel to the development in Malakand Division, a socio-religious movement started in Khyber Agency (FATA). This was known asTanzeem-i-Ittihahad-e-Ulama-i-Qabail (TIUQ). The workers of theTanzeem challenged government authority by taking law and order into their own hands. They imposed harsh punishments upon local people. The government had no other option than to order several military operations to establish its writ in the Khyber Agency, albeit temporarily. A decisive operation in August 1995 against the tribesmen resulted in the deaths of twenty-one people. Later on, the government released several leaders of the TIUQ on the assurance that government authority would not be challenged in the future.[^208]   Though both TNSM and TIUQ are based on local motives, they draw strength from the common slogan of Sharia and the same segment of the society. The PPP government confronted this situation until its dismissal in November 1996.

These religious movements and other extremist groups to raise important concerns and politicize public opinions were unquantifiable contributors to the provincial and national changes made by the caretaker government after the dismissal of the PPP government at the center. After the election of 1997 the provincial government of Pakistan Muslim League and Awami National Party confronted the same situation that had been faced by the previous government. In June 1997 the provincial government lifted the ban on the TNSM and the activities of Sufi Mohammad. The chief Minister promised that the establishment ofQazi courts would be reviewed in Malakand Division.[^209] In spite of heavy electoral success of Pakistan Muslim League and Awami National Party in the province, neither rising extremism could be overcome nor could the issue of law and order could be permanently resolved.

Many factors are said to be responsible for the failure of successive democratic governments to overcome the menace of extremism. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan is counted to be the main external factor in this context. The Taliban being the product of DMs in Pakistan had deep relations with the leadership of religious parties and most of the large DMs in the NWFP and tribal areas. Among the internal factors the failure of the judicial system to deliver speedy justice and the close links of the Inter Services Intelligence Agency (ISI), an intelligence wing of the Pakistan army, with the extremist religious groups along with local issues are responsible for ever-increasing extremism and militancy in Pakistani society.[^210]

Recommendations of Educational Policies and Council of Islamic Ideology

The recommendations of the first Educational Conference (1947) and those of all educational policies declared that a uniform educational system should be introduced in the country. Similarly, the reforms in the religious education were proposed to bring it at par with the formal educational system in the country. The National Educational Policy (1979) recommended utilizing mosques for the universalizing of primary education. Theimams (prayer leaders) of mosques should be employed in such schools along with other teachers for this purpose.[^211] National Educational Policy 1998-2010 proposed the establishment of aDin-i-madaris Board for maintaining the standard of education inDin-i-madaris through standardization of curricula and examination system, equivalence ofasnad   (certificate), award of scholarships, grant-in-aid  and financial assistance by the government. The willingtanzeems of independentmadaris will be eligible for affiliation by the board. Modeldar-ul-ulums were to be established through phased programs at divisional level throughout the country to absorb the graduates of thesemadaris in the market for technical, vocational and formal educational courses. A Proposal for removing the three-tier system of education (English medium, Urdu medium anddin-i-madaris ) was recommended.[^212]

The Council of Islamic Ideology also recommended a comprehensive reforms package for the educational system in the country. The recommendations of the Council of Islamic Ideology 1975-76 stated that all the branches of learning and education on study of sciences and religion belong to Islamic educational system provided that the elements that are opposed to Islamic ideals are removed. Hence, no educational institution should be considered outside the ambit of Islamic educational system. The deficiencies and gaps are filled up by adding the study of theHoly Qur’an and teaching of Islam to the curriculum of the institutions of general education. On the other hand, subjects helpful in modern times are included in the curriculum of the institutions of religious education. The essential atmosphere for preserving Islamic ideals of character, morality and spiritual zeal is maintained in all the institutions. It should be seen that the curriculum and general atmosphere of all the institutions are conducive to the fundamental ideals of Islamic unity, brotherhood, love for the country, and the Islamic ideals for which Pakistan came into existence. Similar recommendations, made in 1978 by the CII, were aimed at the establishment of uniform educational system in the country (bringing all the streams of educations into a single uniform system).[^213]

The foregoing discussion revealed that repeated efforts for integration of the traditional educational sector with that of the formal education system could not be realized since 1947. The main reasons in this regard were the lack of commitment on the part of bureaucracy and non-cooperation of the clergy. Theulema always considered such moves as part of a direct threat to their influence and a challenge to their authority. On the other hand, the governments, especially military governments, tried to legitimize their claims to political power through such measures and were not able to gain the confidence ofulema for this purpose. Despite all these efforts the dichotomy in the educational system was more visible after more than 50 years than it had been in 1947.