Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Thaqalain

Listen real history of Pakistan from Dr. Mubarak

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Lets listen and read views of Dr. Mubarak Ali about history of Pakistan before he will be blacklisted/de-funct like Josh Malih Abadi,G.M. Syed.

Dr Mubarak is author of around 50 books and also editor of Urdu-language quarterly ‘Tareekh’. pr

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL HISTORY

Preliminary list of the papers of

MUBARAK ALI

1974-2003

Amsterdam

2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION

Mubarak Ali is historian. During more than twenty he was head of the Department of History at the University of Sindh in Pakistan. He publishes books and articles in English and Urdu on Pakistani history in the twentieth century. He wrote especially on the partition of India, the new start of Pakistan since 1947 and the rewriting of Pakistani history because of ideological reasons for instance by the Jamaat-i-Islami which opposed the Pakistan Movement.

The papers were received by the IISH in 2004 and contain correspondence, manuscripts, typescripts and articles on Mogul India, British India and the partition from 1947 and particularly the role of Moslems, Islam and Islamic themes. The size of the papers is 0,75 m.

Consultation

Consultation of the papers is not restricted.

PRELIMINARY LIST

1-2. Correspondence.

3A-B. Dr. Mubarak's articles published in English newspapers.

4. Handwritten manuscripts.

5. Correspondence.

6. Handwritten and typed articles on text books.

7. Dr. Mubarak's articles published in English newspapers.

8. Handwritten manuscripts.

9. Unpublished articles by other authors.

10-11A-B. Dr. Mubarak's articles published in English newspapers.

12. Correspondence.

13. Dr. Mubarak's articles published in English newspapers.

14. Dr. Mubarak's Urdu manuscripts.

15A-B. Urdu manuscripts.

16A-B. Various papers read in conference.

17A-B. Conference papers.

18. Private jails: Statements and articles published in the press.

19. Papers relating to Pakistan-India peoples forum.

20. Correspondence.

21. Handwritten Urdu manuscripts by various authors.

22. Conference papers in Sindhi and English.

23. Correspondence - Greeting cards.

24. Various research papers.

25. Dr. Mubarak's articles on Islam/Muslims.

26. Dr. Mubarak's articles on Ulema and other Islamic issues.

27. Dr. Mubarak's articles on Muslim India.

28. Dr. Mubarak's articles published in English newspapers.

29. Papers relating to SAARC and the New World.

30. History and Society: Research-in-Progress Papers.

31. Papers on Mughal India.

32. Seminar on Pakistan Studies, 11-12 May, 1989 SOAS, London.

33. Dr. Mubarak's papers on Mughal India.

34. Conference papers.

35A-D. Miscellaneous papers.

[top]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intellectual and historian Dr Mubarak Ali is a prolific writer who has produced around fifty books on mainly historical themes. His work is commendable on at least four counts. First, he has taken to himself the task of bringing history to the common man and impressing on him the relevance of this discipline to an understanding of contemporary times. By taking to writing popular history Dr Mubarak Ali - like others engaged in the genre - has certainly taken a risk. His work could be looked down upon by those professional historians who write for a selective readership directly involved with the discipline. Dr Ali's books are for commoners - general readers, students, political workers, etc. Over the years they have increasingly won wide acclaim.

Secondly, by writing on themes other than political history and by bringing under the spotlight of historical inquiry subjects like society, culture, architecture, beliefs, attitudes, etc, Dr Ali has demonstrated how wide and multifaceted the discipline of history has become. He has written on diverse subjects such as the history of personal lives, eating habits, low-castes, slavery, dacoits, racism, cities, and war and peace, apart from political history of the Mughals and other Indian dynasties. (The Mughal period was his initial area of interest in which he did his original work.) Another important area on which he has focused his writing is the analysis of historiography itself, its various schools of thought and the sociopolitical contexts in which they have evolved.

Thirdly, Dr Mubarak Ali has come up with a strong critique of the official historiography of our country raising fundamental questions challenging the authenticity of its underlying assumptions. He holds that once moulded to fit in the ideological straitjacket of the state, history loses its objectivity and its relevance for human and social development.Fourthly, Dr Mubarak Ali has taken his discipline and its projection and popularization as a mission. In doing so he has been compelled to repeat his message which is understandable given the activist nature of his mission.

The two new books by Dr Mubarak Ali under review testify to the above qualities.Tarikh Ki Talash comprises eleven original and relatively longer articles with necessary references and notes. Avoiding the empirical method, the author has written these articles in a theoretical framework in order to be able to address issues as important as ideology, state, and historiography. Writing about the problems of writing history in Pakistan, he shows how under the constraints imposed by the state, history was written with national and political objectives.

He says that under the steelframe of ideology, history was written at the cost of objectivity, thereby relegating the historians to the status of what Eric Hobsbawm described as, the 'functionaries of ideology'. Moreover, with the shifts in the ideological imperatives of the state, the focus of the state sponsored history also shifted.

Thus once the focus was on Muslim exclusivity in the subcontinent. Later, the Hind-Islamic assertion was replaced by the focus on Pakistani regions and their autonomous existence over centuries. Thereafter, the historical links of these regions with the Middle East and Central Asia were projected to give credence to the new geopolitical interests of the state.

Another article discusses the emergence of cities in different epochs and the role they played in transforming human society, values, tastes and habits. Followed by this is an article on Karachi and its growth from a small seaport in the nineteenth century to a metropolitan city with diverse ethnic and religious groups often at loggerheads with each other. The article on Lahore is a bit sketchy but it at least succeeds in highlighting one point, that is, the manifest difference between the colonial and the post-colonial Lahore.

The book also conntains three articles on different themes pertaining to Punjab: the origin of the Sikh religion, the nature of Ranjit Singh's rule, and the role and status of women in Punjabi society. These articles cumulatively bring forth some important dimensions of the politics and society of Punjab in the past and the present.

Tarikh Ki Awaz is a collection of 48 small essays published in newspapers and periodicals. These cover a number of subjects including socio-political aspects of medieval India; partition and its various explanations; Pakistan's contemporary political, social and educational problems; art and culture and their social utility; the contributions of Ali Abbas Jalalpuri, Hamza Alavi, Josh Maleehabadi and Ghulam Kibria, etc to intellectual life. Moreover, there are pieces on the conflict between the West and the Muslims. Though brief, these analytical articles question some of the existing assumptions and try to offer a fresh understanding of the issues involved.

For instance, the author tells us that the Western image of Islam has not always been the same and that the Western perceptions changed along with the changes in its relationship with the Muslim world in the past.

We are also informed that moving away from the traditional colonial and national assertions, new trends in the historiography of the subcontinent are now emerging. They are bringing the focus of historical inquiry to the grassroots communities, their interests and internal dynamics.

The author also discusses religious revivalism in the past and shows how it is related to present day fundamentalism. In a piece on Tipu Sultan, the author comes out with some very refreshing information. He shows how Tipu modernized his state and tried to strengthen it militarily with the help of the French against the juggernaut of the East India Company. Highly impressed by the French revolution, Tipu Sultan established Jacobian clubs in Seringapatam.

About Abraham Lincoln, the author holds that his anti-slavery policy was motivated by the pragmatic political interests of the American union, while Lincoln was hardly anti-racist in his personal views. The author dispels the myth of Napoleon's greatness and shows how the myth was woven round his personality for French national consumption but has been borrowed by us uncritically. Napoleon could be a model for authoritarian rulers particularly those in uniform but can never inspire those who believe in people's supremacy.

The author laments the miserable state of education in Pakistan. He analyses the reasons behind our underdevelopment in education, poverty of research, the commercialization of education and the failure of the state in the domain of education. In short the books under review promote consciousness about history and highlight its social purpose. History emerges as a source of knowledge which may serve as a source of enlightenment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lets listen and read views of Dr. Mubarak Ali about history of Pakistan before he will be blacklisted/de-funct like Josh Malih Abadi,G.M. Syed.

(salam)

I don't think this is correct. I don't see any thing as such in the Review that he will be black listed.

The author also discusses religious revivalism in the past and shows how it is related to present day fundamentalism. In a piece on Tipu Sultan, the author comes out with some very refreshing information. He shows how Tipu modernized his state and tried to strengthen it militarily with the help of the French against the juggernaut of the East India Company. Highly impressed by the French revolution, Tipu Sultan established Jacobian clubs in Seringapatam.

I am not much interested in History. I don't mean I hate my Country's history, love it but I am not into reading much History related books other than Course ones & I have not read this point in my Books nor have I listened from my teachers! Interesting...

About Abraham Lincoln, the author holds that his anti-slavery policy was motivated by the pragmatic political interests of the American union, while Lincoln was hardly anti-racist in his personal views. The author dispels the myth of Napoleon's greatness and shows how the myth was woven round his personality for French national consumption but has been borrowed by us uncritically. Napoleon could be a model for authoritarian rulers particularly those in uniform but can never inspire those who believe in people's supremacy.

Gr8... :)

The author laments the miserable state of education in Pakistan. He analyses the reasons behind our underdevelopment in education, poverty of research, the commercialization of education and the failure of the state in the domain of education. In short the books under review promote consciousness about history and highlight its social purpose. History emerges as a source of knowledge which may serve as a source of enlightenment.

This is something which is unfortunately so true :( & has been said by other Authors as well.

Thanks very much for posting this :). May Allah bless you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Profile of Dr. Mubarak Ali By Khurram Shafique. DAWN, Tuesday Review, Aug 27-Sep 2, 1996

I was pleasantly surprised. He had decided to start the conversation with a comment on Prof. A. H. Dani’s profile published on these very pages.

"What has disturbed me," he said, "is the statement by Dr Dani about the incident when historians were called by the government of Ayub Khan to write A Short History of Pakistan. Dr Dani has mentioned that I. H. Qureshi wanted to compile a history of the Indian subcontinent, whereas Dr Dani was in favour of writing a history of this region, Pakistan, only. I have no problem with his statement up to this point, but thenhe narrates that he told Ayub Khan, ‘I can write both. You decide!’ This really provoked me because Dani Saheb is a well-known scholar and we respect him. But the way he has put this thing, it is not right… This is a democratic age, and a historian must be free. Unfortunately Dani Saheb seemed to have adjusted his views."

This attack is very much in tradition with the rest of what Dr Mubarabk Ali has said and written over the last many years. His books (nearly forty) are widely read – not for their academic worth, about which he himself says that he does not write for the academicians – but for the new perspectives he gives in them. Usually, he succeeds in shocking his readers. A 120 minute conversation with him was refreshing experience that I would like to share with the readers in a straightforward manner. Here is a segmented account of what he said, and my occasional insertions (within brackets.)

Writing history without historians:

"Recently, when the National Institute of History and Culture took up the task of publishing history they also approached me. I refused. I said I don’t like to write history under any government. A historian or an intellectual has to sacrifice in order to maintain his integrity. It is his responsibility to be independent, to be objective.

"The whole project, headed by Mr Fakhr Zaman, who is a friend of mine, is very defective. You know, these people do not know how history is written. Because there can be a number of different points of view: nationalist point of view, communalist point of view, Marxist point of view. In India they have different schools such as subaltern school of studies, now they say history from the below, not history from the above. And then the South Eastern have the imperialistic school of thought in history. In France, there is much emphasis on social, cultural history – they call it annals school. They write history of sensibilities or history of mentalities. They say that now history has such a grasp (over) human society that you can even write the history of emotions or the history of tears. So now history has completely changed. It’s no more political history, its no more economic history. The social and cultural history has more scope. It is unfortunate that in Pakistan they don’t have trained historians who can write this type of history.

"I was also one of the members of this National commission of History and Culture. I don’t know how somebody nominated me. My objection was that instead of asking history teachers to write the history it is better to train the historians. It will take five years to ten years but you can train the young generation of historians, inviting historians from different countries – from India, from Britain, from France, from Germany. I know the history departments from Sindh to Peshawar. Their history teachers are no historians. We don’t have any historians particularly for the mediaeval period (Sultanate and Mughal) because historians specializing in that period must know the Persian language to study the original sources. This is the reason why I think the project has no chance of success. But there was Kaneez Yousuf. She wasx the consultant of this commission… I wrote a small article, writing history without historians. Then, as usual, she became very angry and wrote a long article against me. Instead of giving an argument about how to write history or where to get historians she personally attacked the point of view I usually adopt in my history writing.

History writing in the Muslim South Asia over the last hundred years:

"Now some people even say that Shibli was not a historian. Actually Shibli’s problem was that during his period there was a lot of attack on Islam and Islamic history because that was a period when the East India Company became the ruler of India and it was their attempt to discredit everything which belonged to the past. There were a lot of challenges, and attacks, and that is the reason why the attitude of Shibli and Ameer Ali and other historians was apologetic. To defend themselves, rather than to attack. And even sir Syed Ahmed Khan – he went to England to collect material (for writing) Khutbat-e-Ahmedia against Sir William Muir, who had written a book on the life of the Prophet (pbuh). "Only in the later period when the (Indian) intellectuals became a little bit confident did they start to attack the Western historians and writers. That was when nationalism became strong in India and the national historians emerged. (And there were also Muslim nationalist historians who were not apologetic) such as K. M. Ashraf. He was also a very good historian. And Mahdi Hasan, who wrote a very good thesis on the Tughlaq Period. Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi belongs also to this generation. He had some confidence and defended the Muslim rule in India. His thesis, The Administration of the Delhi Sultanate was excellent. But after the partition he became idea-locked to the Pakistani ideology. And then, as a matter of fact, he came to the belief that the Muslim rule was an ideal rule in India: the welfare state was there and the Muslims very tolerant, and so on. He even went so far as to accuse Akbar for the down fall of the Mughal Empire. Actually this point of view had been there even before him. Somewhere in 1880s there was even a debate at Aligarh University on this topic. And then I. H. Qureshi academically put forward this thesis in his books and writings. No doubt, he was a very good hikstorian who used the original sources but he became very communalistic. A great loss to the history of the mediaeval period.

I would like to relate this incident. I was once looking up A Short History of Pakistan by I. H. Qureshi. The chapter on the Mughals was written by Professor Rasheed. As I was reading his views on Akbar, I found that one paragraph is the same as it is in I. H. Qureshi’s The Muslim Community in the subcontinent, (published a few years before A Short History of Pakistan). So it surprised me because Prof. Rasheed was also a very great scholar. But, of course, my doubt was that Prof. Rasheed took this whole paragraph from that book without naming I. H. Qureshi. In 1992, when they were celebrating the 450th birthday of Akbar in India, I was also invited by Irfan Habib to read a paper… There Irfan Habib informed me that Prof. Rasheed, who was his teacher at Aligarh, had personally told him that the passage was actually inserted by I. H. Qureshi without informing him. I don’t know whether Prof Rasheed challenged him or not, perhaps he also kept silent. But this is quite unprincipled, you know. But I. H. Qureshi put this for propagating his own point of view.

Sir Syed, Iqbal and the revolution:

(Reformation and the revolution are two concepts which are used by the serious historians very carefully, often in contrast to each other. However, in popular writing they sometimes get mixed up. For instance, you may find references to the achievements of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Iqbal where these two words are used interchangeably.

Mubarak Ali comments on this: "There was no revolution. Because revolution means radical change – upside down- within a very short span of time. But as a matter of fact after the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution it has become a very respectable word. Everybody is using this word: green revolution occurs in societies where you block all the ways of reform. So, as a matter of fact Sir Syed Ahmed suggested a few things to improve the society but not to revolutionise it.

"Same is the case with Iqbal. He was not a revolutionary poet at all, he was a very reactionary poet. And sometimes his poetry is meaningless: Kafir hai toe shamshir pay karta hai bharosa. Momin hai to baytegh bhi ladta hai sipahi. He tries to appeal to the emotions of the people.

Now some people talk about his lectures. But even those lectures are an attempt to justify religion through science and philosophy. Many people have tried to do this in Islam, in Christianity… this is what Iqbal did, this is what Maudoodi did, more or less, this is what Pervaiz did. And even today so many people are trying to do the same thing.

"So (Iqbal’s lectures) were an attempt to make Islam acceptable to the modern mind. So, you see, he has taken many concepts from the philosophy of the West, which were valid and popular in his own days but are neither valid nor popular today. We have glorified Iqbal too much, otherwise in his own days his impact was perhaps quite limited. Even there, his (early) poetry, Bang-e-Dara, is really very good and appealing but the rest is mere sermonizing… And then there is mere hatred against the West. Hatred is not enough (to create a philosophy). You need to understand the mechanism of the West.

"He was a poet but he didn’t have any political vision. Now, they talk about his Allahabad Address (1930). There is a lot of criticism on that. There is no mention of Bengal at all. That is why some people say this was a greater Punjab plan. And then, in the letters he wrote later to Thompson, he said he had nothing to do with (the idea of) Pakistan."

Goethe Institute:

(Dr Mubarak Ali was associated with the Goethe Institute, Lahore, for quite a while.) "No, I don’t blame the locals (for the trouble). After all, it was only Madiha Gauhar’s group, Ajoka that was against me, whereas others supported me. About 20 or 25 organisations from Lahore protested (against my leaving the Goethe.) I don’t even blame (Madiha’s group) so much – you can’t keep everyone happy if you are working in a public organization. I blame the new director of the Goethe Institute.

"I have even been in Germany for about five years, and yes, I am one of those historians who say that Hitler was a continuation of German history, and not an aberration. This phenomenon you can find in most of the Germans. So this is one thing. Secondly – (and if you write this, I would really like to point out through my own experience) – that I find that these foreign (cultural centers) which are running here, such as the British Council, American Centre, German Cultural Centres… these directors, when the come to Pakistan they are not so arrogant. But slowly and gradually our elite class just besieges these people and spoils them. Within a year, they become a part of the same feudal culture.

"I remember, the previous director was a very good friend of mine and actually he asked me to come and take charge. He was a very friendly person in the beginning. Then I saw him change slowly, the same feudal culture was adopted by him. Actually what happens is that these people usually live in two-room flats in their own countries and work in small cubicles. Here they live like princes. And then they develop a contemptuous attitude towards the people of this country. With the previous director I had relationship of colleagues. Now, (this director) started to tell that he is my boss. I just corrected him: ‘No, you are not my boss, you are just my colleague. We are equals.’ Some other people then intervened (between me and the director). And actually then he asked me to have a mutual agreement and leave the Institute, because they didn’t like to terminate my services to avoid a scandal or the embarrassment of such an action. But even then, when he misbehaved (with) me… some of my friends and colleagues became very angry. They wrote letters to the headquarters of the Goethe Institute, to the ambassadors and some others. And then he told me that the German community in Pakistan would ‘support me, and not you’. And I think that was correct.

"The other thing, all the Pakistani intellectuals, even though they know that he misbehaved (with) me, they are all cooperating with him. Even some of those who (had) supported me. So, you know, we don’t have any character. Our intellectual class, you know, is very bankrupt… So that is the reason I don’t have any relationship with the Pakistani intellectuals except a few…"

What I am doing these days:

"I am still jobless since leaving the Goethe Institute (this interview was conducted in the first week of July 1996). The only offer I have received is from Jawaharlal Nehru University (India) as a visiting professor. I agree it takes time because they also have to take permission from their Home Ministry.

I haven’t got any offer from (within) Pakistan. In fact, the Punjab University flatly said that Mubarak Ali is not acceptable to us…. Because of his views.

"Here (in Lahore) I am trying to open a college of social sciences. It is my dream. Because I believe that only learning natural sciences you can improve your technology. But scientific thinking is created only after reading the social sciences. Without social sciences we cannot solve our problems.

"These days I am more drawn to the social and cultural history. Two of my recent books are Khanay Kay Adab and Niji Zindagi ki Tareekh. Now I have collected some material on the British Raj and I am thinking about it. Because many people here have got this nostalgia for the Raj, they think that the British Raj was better…. So, why people think so? And what was the British Raj at that time? There are so many things but the problem is that alone you can’t do a lot of things. We don’t have institutions. We don’t have research scholars. You don’t get assistants.

"The problem is that sometimes I cannot use the whole source material because it is not available. I try to use whatever is available. I don’t claim I am a perfectionist. So this is not a well researched work. I just try to re-interpret history and to give an understanding to the people of how to read and interpret it later on by themselves.

"There are a number of projects I would like to take up (if given a bunch of impressionable minds). It is my dream to train some historians before I leave this world. It is to continue the tradition. There are very interesting topics (of social and cultural history). Perhaps somebody could write on ‘the concept of honour during the mediaeval period’. Somebody could expound ‘the concept of poverty in history’. And especially in the Indian history, there are a number of betrayals, a number of traitors. Why people betrayed their own society? You can perhaps work out why there have been Ambhi, Jafar, Sadiq? Why? So, there is a lot of scope if we apply some of the thinking of the annals school of thought to our own cultural and social history.

"Even in political history new experiments can be made. For example, the subaltern historians (writing history from the below) could take up those aspects which have been left out by the traditional historians. For instance, the showmaker’s strike at Gorakhput.

"Even to read a text is (a specialized domain and ) very important. When I was in Germany as a research student I was trained in this technique. This is where you can get the material. Suppose if somebody was living in the times of Akbar, suppose you read Badayuni. If you read him carefully then you will find a number of things in his one page. Because these historians (when) they could not write openly (they buried) hidden meanings - sometimes in words, sometimes in similes. Same is the case even with Abul Fazal – Akbar’s court historian. But he was a very clever historian because he revised his Akbarnamah five times. Even there you can find criticism on Akbar. But you have to read (between the lines) to get the hidden meaning. Unfortunately nobody, has done that in Pakistan."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×