Modernising Madrasa Education

In a predominantly Muslim University town of north India, I was once, a silent participant, among a group of students, to a very interesting discussion on Islam and science. Let me make it clear from the very beginning that they were not discussing the relationship between ‘science’ and ‘Islam’. Neither did the discussion even tangentially touch what constituted the practice of science. Also their understanding of Islam was not part of critical scrutiny. 

The discussion assumed what constituted Islam and science, and the contours of thedebate was, so to say, to ‘prove’ that the technological advancements of human civilization were all foretold in the verses of the Quran. Science, in their sense, was exemplified through computers, huge buildings, missiles and other marvels and thus was hardly distinguishable from technology. Andthat these things that men have invented now, have all been alluded to in various verses of the Quran. 

I could not follow all the verses, which they were quoting but the method was apparent. This method was to relate modern technological gadgets, in terms of both form and function, to one or more verses of the Quran. Even if there was a remote resonance, then it would mean that the object had been foretold in the Quran! The discussion therefore, to repeat, was not about Islam and science; rather it was an attempt to prove that Islam is science.

The group comprised of madrasa graduates and some engineering students. 

Later on I caught up with one discussant of this group. A graduate of Nadwatul Ulama in Lucknow, he came to the university and had joined the Islamic studies department. Nadwatul Ulama, a madrasa founded by Maulana Shibli Numani in 1894, firmly believed that the future of Indian Muslims lay in the hands of a new class of Ulama who, while being firmly grounded in Islamic traditionalism, would, at the same time, be conversant with the challenges of modern life. It was just in the fitness of things that a graduate of this madrasa sought to reconcile the two seemingly divergent traditions of science and religion, although in his own special way. His acquaintance with other students of the group was through the work ofTabligh.

Now Tabligh Jamaat or the ‘Faith Movement’ founded by Maulana Muhammad Ilyas is perhaps the biggesttransnational Muslim movement in the world, based at its headquarters in Delhi. The Jamaat stresses the need of personal improvement of Muslims through the constant remembrance of god and works primarily among the Muslims, when batches of Tablighis interact with ordinary Muslims to remind them of their duty towards Islam and god. Interestingly enough, in this case, the most devoted members of the Tabligh were to be found among the engineering graduates!

My interaction with this young graduate of Nadwatul Ulama made me understand some of the anxieties and hopes which a student might have in coming to a new place, and then exposed to alternative ways of thinking. The way in which he had resolved this tension was through allocating primacy to scriptural sources (the Quran) over and above every observable phenomenon. This approach did not mean shutting out the world,but simply not being able to talk about it because of the lack of knowledge. The positive thing about this approach is its active engagement with the here and now, the temporal, the ways of the world so to say. 

This anxious restlessness, this desire to grapple with new technologies, the desire to understand its basis, is in itself a very modern activity; far removed as it is with the taken for granted attitude of non-modern sectors. It is perhaps too early to fathom the results of this new engagement of Islam with science. Nevertheless, it is a sign perhaps of an internal churning within Indian Muslims. The very fact that science is being explained Islamically points to its influence and impact on the occupants of the ‘non-modern’ sector. 

Everyday consumption of television images is bound to throw up few questions about one’s relationship to the world and one’s role within it. What our Muslim students were doing was precisely the same: making sense of the changing world around them. Through religion, they seek to undo a lot of their own anxieties, the resolution of which intellectually satisfies them, till they are confronted with another set of questions.

In another setting, in a rural madrasa in north India, I met students studying for their Fazilat (roughly equivalent to postgraduate, in madrasa terms) degree, roughly equivalent to higher secondary. Hailing from artisan families of north Bihar, they too were interested in talking about science. However, their articulation of relationship between Islam and science differs slightly from the former group of university students. The university students’ understanding of science was predicated upon some familiarity with modern technological innovations as well as its functioning so as to relate it to what has already been told in the Quran. The madrasa students had no such familiarity. Their madrasa, like the majority of them in north India, did not have adequate resources to organize the teaching of science. The students’ understanding of ‘science’ therefore did not go beyond rudimentary information about Indian geography. Yet there was a marked enthusiasm to talk about science and how modern scientists have corrupted it!

These students argued that Muslims discovered all sciences. This assertion was backed by a long commentary on the Quran, which meant that since the holy book is the last word on everything in this world and beyond, it contains information about everything including science. They cited the names of Muslims like Ibn Sina(Avicenna) who, they argued, was the greatest scientist because he laid the foundation of medicine. As a devout Muslim, he found solution to his problems in the Quran. Muslims of a later period forgot about this divine guidance and consequently could not progress. In fact, Christians and the Jews read the Quran and that was why they made so manydiscoveries. 

These students also argued that some of the major scientists were all Muslims but their names were changed and hence we do not know them as Muslims anymore. They were convinced that Isaac Newton was a Muslim whose first name they pronounced as ‘Ishaq’ rather than Isaac. There were many other ‘Muslim scientists’ in their list whose names were changed by Jews and Christians. At least two students told me that it was their mission to prove that all major scientists were Muslims.

Apart from this conception that all major scientists were Muslims, the madrasa students shared the ‘science as technology’ understanding of the university students. SinceGod created earth and put human beings on it, he also gave hints so as to make their life comfortable. The objective of science therefore is to further such comfort. It has worked wonders by, among other things, reducing the time for Haj travel. It is therefore not surprising that most Islamic leaders today use the latest gadgets when they can afford it. 

The very fact that relationship between science and Islam is being discussed in even such a traditional sector such as that occupied by the madrasas is indicative of some deeper processes. From a time in late 19th century, when Rashid Ahmad Gangohi opposed even the teaching of philosophy in Deoband Madrasa, to now when ‘science and technology’ are everyday matters of discussion in madrasas; the traditional Muslim sector has indeed come a long way. 

It may be argued that this sector is increasingly feeling the pressures of ‘modernity’ and trying to come to terms with it. Given the contemporary social and economic churning in Indian society, it can be safely said that as more and more of this traditional sector opens up and gets directly linked to market, most importantly through processes of migration, this debate-- ‘Islam and science’ -- will only gain momentum. 

Although it is too early to see the direction of this ‘debate’, it can be discerned that this understanding of science is not about the celebration of a critical individual. Rather its sole concern is about improving an average Muslims’ everyday life. Science here is not about creative uncertainties, of ceaseless explorations, of being a method of critical awareness. Science here is all about livelihood and consumption.

Such a conception of science is widely shared. Teachers and principals of various madrasasargue that science is not anti-Islam; rather it is a tool to show the glory of God. Every Muslim should study science but with an Islamic purpose: of proving that every word of the Quran is correct. However, if there is contradiction between Quran and science, then one should endeavour to falsify the facts of science! This was even attempted by one of the leading scholar of 19th century, Riza Ahmad Khan, who in his own special way ‘proved’ that actually it was the sun which revolved round the earth rather than vice versa. 

Madrasa scholars make a vital difference between ‘ilm’ and ‘fann’. By ‘ilm’ theymean religious knowledge, knowledge based on Quran and Hadith. On the other hand,‘fann’ or ‘hunar’ included other capitals required to lead a comfortable life. Fann did not only mean learning the crafts or trading skills, but also included scientific study of social and material reality, since they are all meant to earn a living. There was a distinct conception of something like core knowledge, the only truth which is already present in religious books. Other kinds of knowledge are considered additions to this core, without altering it or even attempting a synthesis between the two.

Such a utilitarian conception of science serves many purposes. Firstly, it renews the legitimacy of the ulama. More and more, the authority of the ulama is being questioned since they are no longer the sole transmitters of religious knowledge. Islam today is being increasingly accessed by ordinary lay Muslims through print and television, which undermine the authority of ulama whose legitimacy largely depends on personal transmission of religious knowledge. Technology provides them a wider and anonymous audience, making them more visible and ensuring that they do not fade away from public memory. In a sense, therefore, the embrace of modern technology by the ulama is not only an attempt to remain relevant but also to arrest their declining influence among the Muslims.

Secondly, it gives them a contemporary face. Recently, ulama and madrasas have some under criticism for not including modern subjects in the curriculum. The argument is that the dars e nizami, the curriculum taught in madrasas, does not equip students to earn a living in the modern world. And it is precisely for this purpose that they want the introduction of science and other modern subjects in the syllabus. 

It is rather ironic but true that both the ulama and their critics share the same utilitarian notion of science. It is perhaps under such pressure that madrasas are now keen to point out that Islam is not anti-science and that there is no harm in teaching science in madrasas. Apart from taking the winds of criticism out from the sails of its opponents, this position also gives the madrasa and ulama a very contemporary face, which is ready to change with changing times. It is, however, another matter as to how many madrasas would really promote the teaching of science within their sacred boundaries.

By way of a conclusion, it seems plausible to argue that contemporary debates about introduction of modern subjects in madrasas do not appreciate the epistemological dichotomy of ilm and fann, which the madrasas practice. Science in madrasas is primarily understood as a ‘skill’ to earn one’s livelihood. There is a fundamental religious core, the dissemination of which is their primary role. Science and other modern subjects are all welcome to the extent that they do not disturb this fundamental core which is considered to be true for all times to come. Far from being a critical methodology, science here becomes a tool for the further refinement of religion. 

All well meaning debates on madrasa reform will have to take this into consideration and perhaps develop a model through which religious and non-religious subjects can be integrated into a well meaning whole. If the object of reform is to produce a critical citizenry through ‘modern’ madrasa education then they should pay better attention to this problematic aspect of integrating two very different worldviews. 

The Indian government’s programme of modernisation of madrasa education also suffers from the same lacuna. Far from suggesting ways to bring madrasa students into the educational mainstream, it gives sops to madrasas by way of some funds to arrange for teaching of modern subjects. Little thought is given to the purposes of introducing such subjects in madrasas and the results that it might have. By simply making modern subjects as an ‘add-on’ to the existing and unquestioned religious core, we are bound to create more Muslims who would be experts in arguing and perhaps also ‘proving’ that the basis of genetic engineering lies in theQuran!

Arshad Alam is with the Center for Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia