Opinion Akbar and Aurangzeb, Pakistan and India – what history textbooks tell us about the two countries

A few hundred kilometres from the NCERT’s office in New Delhi, lies the Pakistan Studies office in Lahore. The stated aim of Pakistan Studies is to enhance students’ knowledge about the history, culture and geography of Pakistan and to inculcate patriotism. Every school student of Pakistan must study Pakistan Studies textbooks till higher secondary.

School textbooks provide the necessary foundation to build a national identity. The representation and misrepresentation of facts are often used by the state apparatus to build the national consciousness and mould the national imagination of children. Further, the narrative around history and historical figures is also central to how politics is conducted.

Akbar, who has become a contested figure in recent years, has been described by NCERT as a “blend of brutality and tolerance”. One would think that Pakistan textbooks would be kind to Akbar, as he fits into the “Muslim ruler” criteria of Pakistan. This is seen in the selective erasure of non-Muslims rulers from history textbooks. But the use of adjectives to portray Akbar’s rule is similar to that of the NCERT. For instance, Akbar’s rule is considered “anti-Islamic” as “he promoted Hinduism by marrying Hindu ladies and by allowing free access to the Rajputs and Hindus in his court.” This “aggravated the social environment” of Hindustan.

The siege of Chittor is described in detail by NCERT. It says, “In early conquest, he showed no mercy at the Fort Chittor, which he besieged for more than five months, in the face of determined resistance from the Rajput soldiers. While hundreds of women committed Jauhar… Akbar ordered the massacre of 30,000 civilians.” In the proclamation of victory, Akbar said that he had “succeeded in occupying forts and towns of infidels and established Islam there.” And “with the help of bloodthirsty swords… we have destroyed temples in those places and all over Hindustan”.

Quite predictably, there is no mention of the siege of Chittor and the destruction of temples by Akbar in Pakistan Studies textbooks. However, a revolt is indeed mentioned against Akbar. It came from Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi, who is said to have believed in the two-nation theory 333 years before Chaudhary Rehmat Ali published the circular, ‘Now or Never’, which proposed the Nation of Pakistan.

Sheikh Ahmad is said to have begun “his reform movement when Muslim society was ridden with un-Islamic practices and trends.” He is mentioned in Pakistan Studies textbooks as a Sufi saint who “challenged the might of Akbar”. The glory of Sheikh Ahmad is later reinforced by his “efforts to purge Muslim society of atheist values.” He is said to have stressed upon “Muslims to revert to purer Islam by giving up heretical customs and practices.” His influence grew to the extent that he was able to enlist Abdul Rahim Khan-i-Khana, Khan-i-Mirza Aziz, and other influential personalities in Akbar’s court. Sheikh Ahmad was eventually arrested by Emperor Jahangir and imprisoned in the Fort of Gwalior.

Din-e-Ilahi was a sect founded by Akbar that blended teachings of Hinduism, Christianity, Jainism, Buddhism and Islam to promote religious unity and societal harmony. The Pakistan Studies textbook presents Din-e-Ilahi as “an ill-fated attempt of Akbar to combine salient features of Islam with Hinduism. Its main purpose was the distortion of Islam. Akbar sanctioned a number of un-Islamic practices, which included the worship of the sun… Cow slaughter was prohibited. Azaan, call for prayers, was forbidden. The mosques were to be used as warehouses. Akbar ordered that no child will be named Muhammad in future.”

While these instances have no primary historical evidence, their mention in the foundational history textbooks of Pakistan makes them credible enough to be quoted by academic scholars, invoked by religious clerics, and misused by political leaders.

Din-e-Ilahi fails to find a mention in the new NCERT textbook, but Sulh-i-kul gets space. It was the state policy of Akbar to achieve harmony and tolerance between all religions. “Through interfaith dialogues, appointment of Hindu officials in high positions”, Akbar is credited to have expanded, consolidated and stabilised the empire.

While Akbar finds praise in the NCERT textbook because he abolished jizya, a tax imposed on non-Muslims in Islamic states for protection and exemption, the Pakistan Studies textbook critiques the abolition of jizya by saying it led the Hindus to be elevated to equal status as Muslims. This eventually led to “loss of Muslim political hegemony in Indian Society,” the textbook claims. Sheikh Ahmad is praised for having “wanted jizya to be re-imposed on Hindus and demanded the destruction of Hindu temples.”

In the new NCERT, Akbar’s great grandson, Aurangzeb, is said to have ordered governors of provinces to demolish schools and temples, and that he destroyed temples at Banaras, Mathura, Somnath, and Jain temples and Sikh gurdwaras.

The Pakistan Studies textbook indulges in a historical whitewashing of Aurangzeb’s image by saying, “Many of the European and Hindu writers have tried to paint him (Aurangzeb) as a religious zealot, which he was not. He followed most of the policies which really originated during the reign of Akbar. Even his enemies admit that he was tolerant.”

History textbooks shape the imagination of young minds. While Akbar is mentioned in different lights in NCERT and Pakistan Studies textbooks, the facts remain the same. As E H Carr said, “Study the historian before you begin to study the facts”. It is through this lens that the selective representation of history makes sense.

The writer is a Master’s student of International Relations at South Asian University. He is currently an intern at ‘The Indian Express