Remembering a Reformer: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan

Posted on October 17, 2008
Filed Under >Saad Qaisar, Education, History, People
49 Comments
Total Views: 60997

Share

Saad Qaisar

Today (October 17, 2008) marks the 191st birthday of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817-1898).

In the history of Indian Sub-Continent, the role Syed Sahib played for Muslims of India deserves golden words. Sir Syed was the most influential leader and social reformer of his time. He felt that the socio-economic future of Muslims was threatened by their orthodox aversions to modern science and technology. He made significant contributions in this regard that had long term implications for the Muslims of India that eventually lead to creation of state of Pakistan.

Either it be his advocacy for Urdu to be recognized by British empire as second language of India & a symbol of Muslim heritage or establishment of a ‘Muslim Cambridge’ in form of MAO college at Aligarh, he is seen as a most vocal figure for the rights of Indian Muslims in the second half of 19th century under British Raj. At Aligarh, Sir Syed formed Scientific Society of Aligarh, the first scientific society of its kind in India that assembled Muslim scholars from across India, held annual conferences, disbursed funds for educational causes and regularly published a journal on scientific subjects in English & Urdu.

His views, at times, challenged orthodox clergy who appeared averse to his message of ‘change’.

Today, as we find our nation amidst divergent schools of thought, when one segment of society is bent towards ultra-liberalism & appear to blindly follow western civilization, more of its bad than good and on other end, there are those who are hell bent to stick to age-old orthodox philosophy, do we await another Syed Sahib that would channelize our energies to the middle path. Or can we revive spirit of Syed Sahib’s life as a guideline in all the issues that confront us as a nation? Men like Syed Sahib are born once in decades, or perhaps, centuries! Are we ready to wait centuries for that to happen or reformulate our thought in-line with modern demands, choice is ours!

As Iqbal rightly put it:

aaen-e-nau say darna, tarz-e Kuhan pe aRna
manzil ye hi katthan hai, qaumoN kee zindagi meiN

‘To be afraid of modern ways, to get stuck on age old patterns, is the biggest hurdle in the life of Nations’.

Photo Credits: Khurram Ali Shafique and Wikipedia.com

49 Comments on “Remembering a Reformer: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan”

  1. Uzma says:
    October 17th, 2008 11:00 am

    Great visionary.
    We owe our education, whatever understanding we have today in worldly affairs, our awareness and eventually our nationhood to him.
    Thanks for making us all remember him.

  2. Mansoor says:
    October 17th, 2008 12:04 pm

    A great man who laid the foundation for an educated Muslim middle class which could initially be the force of the independence movement and then run Pakistan. Translation of Sir Syed’s ASBAB-E-BAGHAWAT-E-HIND (https://dart.columbia.edu/library/DART-0044/DART-0044.pdf) is worth a read. Urdu version may also be available on the net. We direly need few like him to revamp our education system.

  3. Aamir Ali says:
    October 17th, 2008 12:47 pm

    Can anyone here elaborate, but briefly, on what was the mainstream mullah reaction to Sir Syed Ahmad Khan ? What kind of obstacles did they put in his path, or whether they actually aided him ?

  4. Anwar says:
    October 17th, 2008 3:10 pm

    Amir; the mainstream mullah reaction to Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was hardly any different than what you would expect… Learning English and associating with Brits was “haram” and so on… That is why at the time of partition there were so few educated Muslims to run the country…. and very few who could articulate for a contiguous state..
    By the way, do you remember how Abdus Salam was honored by the JI students of QA University? I will let someone else elaborate…!

  5. omar says:
    October 17th, 2008 4:35 pm

    The man was better than the mullahs, but not by much. He laid the foundations of educated muslim separatism in North India and therefore bears a lot of responsibility for the disaster of partition. Not exactly a very far-sighted man….

  6. Nihari says:
    October 17th, 2008 6:24 pm

    @Aamir Ali
    Along with decrees of Kufar, everything was tried to stop him. In one meeting he was offered a garland of shoes. He took it off give it to someone and whispered in his ears. After his speech, he thank those who offered their shoes and informed them that they have been sold for 3 annas and the money has been deposited in the college fund.

    Once he requested a rich Englishman of India for a donation. He asked how much he need. He replied 3 lakhs. The Englishman said, I alone can give you his money but if the million of Muslims of India are not ready to do it. Let them rot.

    There was a brief experiment done in Aligarh. Quite unique but for a short time. Graduates were sent to Dar-ul-Aloom Deoband for religious studies and vice versa. It was stopped because of opposition of the mullahs. If it would have continued, it would have been quite a unique social experiment.

  7. Ali Dada says:
    October 17th, 2008 7:26 pm

    The easiest shortcut to bringing education and money to muslim graduates is train them in computer science – it is accessible from the mountains of the North to the beaches of the South – truly only little investment is needed.

  8. Ibrahim says:
    October 17th, 2008 10:17 pm

    He deserved worse than a garland of shoes. ‘Mullah’ didn’t oppose him just because he wanted people to learn English and he was with British (though this was reason enough to oppose him). This is your propaganda. He was opposed because he was a modernist Quraniyoun…those who only believe in Qur’and dismiss the rest of the texts of Islam. He was a secularist on top of it too, which is usually what Quraniyoun are. Same beliefs like most of the people here. So, if he was a secularist, the scholars would have been wrong not to call him a kafir.

    Thank you, Ahmed Khan for your great “service” to Islam. Sorry, Syed Ahmed Khan. Again, sorry, SIR Syed Ahmed Khan. I’m sure he is not even a Syed, but Allah knows best. He’s down to Ahmed Khan. Anyone who wants to stick with the title of Sir must have very low self esteem and must be completely colonized, as Ahmed Khan was.

  9. Aamir Ali says:
    October 17th, 2008 11:19 pm

    Thanks for everyone’s reply and the corroboration by Ibrahim. Looks like the mullahs of today are as jahil as the mullahs during Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s time.

    btw Ibrahim what are you doing on the Internet and using electricity? These are also the inventions of the kuffar. Please turn off your computer.

  10. Zia Ahmed says:
    October 18th, 2008 1:00 am

    @Ali Dada

    Ali I don’t think only computer science training with bring money to country, educational level in all areas should be increased regardless of economical classes difference. A combine effort will be needed to bring educational caliper, money, and raise in economy to culture.

  11. Riaz Haq says:
    October 18th, 2008 1:12 am

    Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was a great benefactor of the Muslims of South Asia. He was often compared by the orthodox clergy with Mutazalites who spearheaded the rationalist movement in Islam under the Abbasid rule.

    While the rationalists produced great philosophers and scientists (Al-Farabi, Ibn Rushd, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Sina, Al-Razi), they also were responsible for excesses against those who opposed the rationalist movement, including several ulema and Imams who favored faith over reason. All of this changed with the arrival of Imam Ghazali (who championed revelation over reason) when the tables were turned on the rationalists and Islamic civilization began its long term decline. No longer did the Muslims try and reconcile faith and reason. Islam choked in the grip of orthodoxy. No longer, as during the reign of the dynamic caliph al-Mamun and the great Haroon al-Rashid, would Muslim, Christian, and Jewish scholars gather and work together in the royal courts. It was the end of tolerance, intellect, and science in the Muslim world. The last great Muslim thinker, Abd-al Rahman ibn Khaldun, belonged to the fourteenth century.

    More than anything else, Muslims need a Sir Syed Ahmad Khan for an Islamic Renaissance, to help revive sciences, the arts and the culture in the Islamic world to pull us out of the dark ages we are in now.

  12. fatima says:
    October 18th, 2008 1:39 am

    welll he was a gr8 man
    i agree to uzma
    we owe our education to him
    coz he was the one who wanted muslims to get scietific education
    so that muslims wont remain behind from others

  13. ali m. m. khan says:
    October 18th, 2008 2:21 am

    OMAR….

    If he indeed laid the foundations of Pakistan then he was indeed a very far sighted man….the best thing to have happened, is Pakistan.

  14. jusathot says:
    October 18th, 2008 2:36 am

    I agree with Ibrahim, about the

  15. Kasim Mahmood says:
    October 18th, 2008 10:43 am

    Well written Saad Qaiser.

  16. Nihari says:
    October 19th, 2008 12:10 am

    After reading some of the comments about Sir Syed I have one advise and one comment. The advice is to read William Darymple’s The Last mogul to have an idea about what state the muslims were at that time. The second book is Hayat-e-javaid by Hali…

    The comment is “Abu Jahal was not killed in Badar. He is alive, well and kicking ass in Pakistan.

  17. October 19th, 2008 9:06 am

    Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was a great visionary and prorably one of the most misunderstood persons ever. His politics revolved around defending the rights of UP-Muslims (regional politics) and safe-guarding the interest of UP Muslims and UPites as a whole then anything else

  18. sidhas says:
    October 19th, 2008 11:13 am

    We are waiting for another one like him

  19. October 19th, 2008 11:42 am

    Quraniyoun, or Ahle Quran are a sect who reject Hadith and rely completely on the Quran for religious guidance. More extreme people follow G. A. Parvez, who was a student of Iqbal and a senior civil servant. His orgnaization is called Toloue Islam. There was an older group, who followed a Maulvie Chakralvi.

    Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was a rationalist, or a Naturalist. He wrote a commentary on Bible as well as Holy Quran. His students included Al-Farahi, who was the teacher of Amin Ahsan Islahi. Islahi was a colleague of Maudoodi during his formative years. Dr. Israr Ahmad and Javed Ghamidi regard Islahi in high esteem and claim to be his students. Islahi’s commentary of the Quran is a major influence on modern scholars of Islam.

    Thus, Sir Syed’s influence on Pakistan is very deep and of an intricate nature. To blame him to be an innovator, we will have to closely scrtuanize Iqbal and Maudoodi as well.

    The orthodoxy, both Deoband and Barelvi as well as Wahabi clerics love Iqbal. But Iqbal was critical of many orthodox views held dear by Indian muslims.

    Anyone who reviles Sir Syed should look into history first. His reforms were of a very political and social nature. We owe the creation of Pakistan to him and we must be thankful for that. His religious views had influenced only a minority who split into different groups and caused more confusion for pakistani muslims. An unfortunate fact, but Sir Syed is not to be blamed for thinking rationally.

  20. Watan Aziz says:
    October 19th, 2008 11:47 am

    If you are a Muslim from South Asia and can read this, then the credit goes Syed Ahmed Khan.

    If you are a Muslim from South Asia and cannot read this, then the work is still unfinished. And miles to go before we sleep.

    If you are a Pakistani or a Bangladeshi, you are reaping the dividends, even if they come with painful jolts by corrupt and inept leadership and ignorant mullahs.

    As for the charge of rejecting ‘other texts of Islam” then he followed the path of Abu Bakr, Omar bin Khatab, Osman Ghani and Imam Ali. The Rashadeen did very well with just one Book for guidance.

    As for the charge of secularlist; Qur’an is “the” secular Book of all faiths. That is why we “make no distinction” between messages and “leave it to Adil” to determine the truth. We merely compete for the good works.

    As for the charge of Kufr; it is crime against Khalik alone and only judged by Malik alone. Those who make this charge exceed even the bounds of Rasool.

    In the competition for “good works”, Syed Ahmed Khan did well.

    Pakistan Zindabad
    Pakistan Paindabad

  21. Ibrahim says:
    October 19th, 2008 4:22 pm

    Barrister, some might have the dignity to go down swinging instead of joining their opponents instead of joining them….says a lot about Ahmed Khan.

    I can write a book just to point out the absolute rubbish Watan Aziz has to say. You’re giving too much credit to Ahmed Khan, not that he deserves any credit.

    As for the charge of rejecting

  22. D_a_n says:
    October 20th, 2008 1:29 am

    @ Ibrahim..

    Good to see you back old friend :)

    Now, without getting into the innanities that you wrote..I just have one question…

    you write with much aplomb that ‘You

  23. D_a_n says:
    October 20th, 2008 1:49 am

    @ Nihari…

    The comment is

  24. October 20th, 2008 4:56 am

    What happened to respectful disagreements. No one in Pakistan knows how to be respectful and graceful when there is a difference of opinion. Sir Syed was not perfect. But his intentions were sincere. He gave education to the muslims. He was a matchless scholar of Hebrew and Arabic. He was a great public servant, a social reformer and educationalist. His apologetic approach towards explaining Islam is only a minor aspect of his life. We should learn to respect our elders.

    This trend is not a new one. During the struggle for Pakistan, Qaid e Azam was ridiculed by the muslim clergy. And it is the same clergy which has set the ugly tradition of reviling public figures in their sermons and speeches. We must learn to respect others. No matter how big our differences are..

  25. PMA says:
    October 20th, 2008 2:49 pm

    “I

  26. Liaquat says:
    October 20th, 2008 5:25 pm

    I think Syed Ahmad Khan and his times repreented the same struggles that we are going through now. The struggles of modernity.

  27. YLH says:
    October 21st, 2008 3:14 am

    Omar,

    That was his finest achievement…. even those secular Muslims from the Indian nationalist camp like Jinnah etc who had not been part of the Aligarh brand and had chosen to join the Congress as Indian nationalists ultimately came to the same conclusion as Sir Syed….

    He represented a modernist and secular consciousness in what was a religio-cultural community… he realized that in a scenario dominated by the Hindu majority, the Muslim minority would be held hostage by Mullahs …

    Unfortunately the revival of 1970s and 1980s all over the Muslim world has squandered many of the advantages that Sir Syed’s thinking brought.

  28. Rashad says:
    October 21st, 2008 3:49 am

    Lutuf , Jinnah was not ridiculed by Muslim clergy only he was also ridiculed by secular left of that time who called him a person who has no knowledge about Islam so in reality Jinnah was abused by fascists of both wings.

    Referring Ahsan eslahi ,Ghamidi and then saying them scholars is quite funny. Ahsan Eslahi was the guy who ridiculed Surah Feel. Ghamidi and Modudi don’t sound different than Ahsan Eslahi since both have written blasphemous words about Islam. Offcourse Ahmad Khan ws the guy who didn’t believe in Jinns who are also creature of Allah and mentioned in Quran.

    “Abu Jahal was not killed in Badar. He is alive, well and kicking ass in Pakistan.”

    Very well said my friend. When I see clean shaved “progressive Muslims” talking about Islam by ridiculing its basic like Jihad, Women rights then I am forced to think what you mentioned in a single statement.

  29. ylh says:
    October 21st, 2008 12:31 pm

    Rashad,

    Syed ataullah shah bukhari, allama mashriqi. Majlis e Ahrar, Maulana Maududi …none of them were “secular left”.

    Meanwhile the Communist Party of India supported Jinnah completely and wholeheartedly.

    Look for “communists and making of Pakistan” …

    And I am not even a commie sympathizer.

  30. D_a_n says:
    October 22nd, 2008 6:05 am

    @ Rashad…

    Your Statement in your last comment:

    ‘When I see clean shaved

  31. Rashad says:
    October 22nd, 2008 9:21 am

    ylh,

    I think I was not clear in my previous statement. Considering Jinnah secular by secular left is itself an example of offending Jinnah’s vision. I am not an “expert” on Jinnah like you but yes I also have access to resources and have read his speeches(not only 11th Auguest speech). :-)

    I know you have been religiously running a movement to “prove” Jinnah was not willing an Islamic state without giving any substantial proof so I better rest my case.

  32. DAUD says:
    October 22nd, 2008 9:50 am

    Reformers have always been attacked by the Mullahs. Sir Syed was attacked by teh mullah mind then and he still is!

  33. Nihari says:
    October 22nd, 2008 1:17 pm

    At the time of partition, the priorities in front of the two nations of India and Pakistan were very clear. Educate your masses, respect your values, generate citizens that can truly be called universal citizens. Isn’t this the same message given by Quran. Is’nt this the same message behind Sir Syed’s movement. Those who criticize him should remember that the other Syed i:e Syed Ahmed Shaheed and Syed Ismail Shaheed called Jihad against the Sikhs but not against the British. They were butchered by their own muslamans because they did the same mistake as the taliban. Instead of gradually bringing them towards the message, they told them they are ignorant idiots. The rest is history. And their message was much more subtle and much more humane than the Talibans.

    Coming back to partition. So which nation prioritize their objectives to the better aims. And which nation decides to find out kuffars among their own selves because we sent the actual ones to the other side of the border at the time of partition. When India is reaching the moon, we are going to the IMF. The simple reason….nobody over their criticizes the founders of their education movement because they might be against certain religious and cultural values. They wholeheartedly accepted their message and immerse themselves in education and still not leaving their cultural and religious norms. They had their issues and they have their issues. But they call the social evils and not a part of their culture. When we are still discussing whether beard is in Islam or Islam is in the beard, they are successful in propagating their better face throughout the globe.

    We can still go down the same route and be a part of history which nobody likes to read or stand up to the rising sun and takes our share of its warmth. We dont have to shed our cultural and religious values because they are all good. But we have to remember…We are all human beings first. In the eyes of an outsider we are just brown people cutting each other throats.

  34. IRFAN says:
    October 22nd, 2008 3:11 pm

    Without Sir Syed there would have been no Pakistan. That is the real reason why the mullahs who hate Pakistan also hate Sir Syed.

  35. Waheed says:
    October 22nd, 2008 10:47 pm

    Guys please stop this childish discussion. Cant we evern just respect our heros in peace without turning it into a shouting match!

  36. Watan Aziz says:
    October 23rd, 2008 12:19 am

    Well, Wiki is an amazing resource. I am not sure if all the information is correct, but their hyperlinks keep you going and going.

    This post has certainly brought education, the needs and the long term dividends of good deeds into perspective.

    Government College Lahore (I am a Ravian) was established about the same time as MAO College and in the heartland of Muslims. But it

  37. PMA says:
    October 23rd, 2008 9:58 am

    Thank you Syed Ahmed Khan and thank you my fellow Ravian ‘Watan Aziz’. Your comments are very appropriate and much needed here. Many of us can relate to your narrative regarding lack of education among Muslims in South Asia and in fact all over the Muslim World. It is in the nature of Mullah to appose modern education. Once educated in modern educational system His ‘flock’ tends to reject His narrow interpretation of Islam. Hence Mullah will always appose modern education. But let us move beyond Mullah. My question is: Why there is no Renaissance among Muslims today? To paraphrase Iqbal: Why are we unable to produce ‘thousand paths at each milestone’? Where are the Syed Ahmad Khans of our time?

  38. Rashad says:
    October 23rd, 2008 10:52 am

    PMA, You didn’t define “Modern Education” here. If Modern education means education in well structured buildings with the help of imported books in English then our Chinese friends should be cursed since they didn’t get rid of old and traditional acupunture method as yet.

    Ironically those who are religiously in favor of “modern” education could not provide examples which were helpful to prosper Pakistan with the help of modern education system. Instead of that I read Pakistanis committing suicide for not having job even doing Masters in different disciplines. Will such advocates issue Visas for these poor products of Modern education system? I know now these guys will not say a word.

    It’s old hobby of Pakistani expats to give lectures like oldies of any family who are usually rejected by their own family members due to their intolerant attitude. Today Pakistan has been suffering a lot due to financial crisis but these Pakistani expats preachers are not willing to help Pakistan by sending their money back to home. Yes they do have money to spend on Internet so that they can share their frustration rather doing something to help Pakistan.

  39. PMA says:
    October 23rd, 2008 3:24 pm

    Dear Rashad: I thought readers will know what I meant by ‘modern educational system’. Obviously I was not right. But there is nothing wrong with ‘well structured buildings’ and ‘books in English’. Just look around. Those educated in English-medium schools, as a group have greater opportunities in life compared to those educated in Urdu-medium schools and Madrassas. These are simple facts of life in Pakistan. And about ‘our Chinese friends’. Well, are we in a position to compare ourselves with Chinese? Chinese are hard working nation equipped with modern education. That is why they are where they are today. Let us not fool ourselves. But I agree with you on one point. There is a lot Pakistani effluent classes could do for the less privileged. But they do not. It is a sad situation which only people like you and I can correct.

  40. Ibrahim says:
    October 23rd, 2008 10:06 pm

    PMA, you say: It is in the nature of Mullah to appose modern education. Once educated in modern educational system His

  41. YLH says:
    October 23rd, 2008 11:45 pm

    Rashad,

    I have all of Jinnah’s speeches… and beyond the fact that he tried to prove that secular democracy was compatible with Islam he doesn’t say anything. The speeches I have quoted are also more tha the 11th August speech (which in of itself was the most important speech and document since it was addressed to the constituent assembly making the constitution and not to some gathering or group of people)… I have quoted atleast 40 or 50 speeches of Jinnah to prove what I said.

    He certainly did not favor the theocratic state that Mullahs favor.

    As for “substantial” proof… I think the appointment of a Hindu Law Minister (Jogindranath had no clue about Islamic law) itself is substantial proof enough that Jinnah wanted a secular state … could you imagine a Law minister in an Islamic state who didn’t even know Islamic law? Even if we were to take away his clear pronouncements on the issue this is enough of a slap on the face everyone who tries to claim what they do.

    As for Jinnah’s references to Islam and Muslims… it must also be remembered that Jinnah called Kemal Ataturk the greatest Musalman of the age worthy of emulation…. and called Turkey the greatest Muslim state of the time. He said so in November 1938 and then repeatedly in the 1940s… and he was well aware of the developments in Turkey … the separation of church and state, the banning of Arabic text etc… his favorite book was H C Armstrong’s Greywolf.

    So given the fact that Jinnah considered religion a matter of personal faith … the fact that he clearly said Pakistan would not be a theocracy to be run by priests with a divine mission (no not the 11th August speech)… the fact that he said clearly
    that sovereignty rested unconditionally with the people (again not the 11th August speech) … the fact he said minorities would be equal citizens without any bar whatsoever (again not the 11th August speech)…. the burden of proof is on you to produce statements that go beyond mere cultural and religious references to Islam or Quran etc… but have a legal bearing … like the 11th August speech which was made to the constituent assembly of Pakistan …

  42. jusathot says:
    October 24th, 2008 12:19 am

    The argument is NOT about education or rather the

  43. PMA says:
    October 24th, 2008 9:23 am

    Complains about Sir Syed Ahmad Khan mostly come from our own Islamist camp. He is accused of being Anglophile. It is understandable why Islamists disapprove of him. He was messing with Mullah’s domain. But we must remember that Muslim political, economical and cultural dominance in South Asia ended by mid-eighteenth century. Our traditional educational system was unable to bring us out of the rot we were in. After a century and half of wandering in the dark finally a man of vision pulled us out of our backwardness. Pakistani nation is indebted to this great man and salutes him with honour. But his work is not done yet. We must equip ourselves with modern education so that we can compete with rest of the world.

  44. Rashad says:
    October 24th, 2008 10:14 am

    YLH,

    Since when Islam believes in theocracy? Are you trying to tell me that Islam is just like Sunday school religion? I doubt what you know about Islam and Islamic Shariah other than considering it an excuse for praying 5 times,fasting and other basic things?

    PMA, “Mullahs are bad” is quite childish comment. It doesn’t sound good to discuss things by making such comments. You are free to give your opinion but when you are discussing with your opponents then do try to get serious. You are not talking your like minded people who hardly try to comprehend things other than what have been “injected” in their minds by Western societies. Learn to digest why some one is opposing you rather acting like Pat Robertson and lashing out at others by giving your fatwas like “Millitants,”members of Islamic Camp etc”. And offcourse we are part of Islamic camp! if you are not then why don’t you reveal your belief? I think no one here has any problem to get engage with followers of other religions.

    “We must equip ourselves with modern education so that we can compete with rest of the world”

    So far you guys have done nothing in past 61 years. How can you do now?

  45. Rashad says:
    October 24th, 2008 10:25 am

    “I hear from people like you is that Jamat-e-Islami”

    *smile*
    Ibrahim Sahib, I am one of the biggest anti-Jamiat-e-Islami and have supported MQM for more than decades and now Imran Khan. So according to PMA’s logic I am not a Mullah anymore? Wohoo! Now I can sleep well.

    @PMA: You didn’t provide me examples how modern education helped Pakistanis? Do you want to say that today Pakistan is facing financial crisis due to Madrassah students appointed in different ministries? Pakistanis have been committing suicide due to inflation and unemployment, are they all madrassah students?

    It’s interesting to see you abused Urdu medium students. Do I need to remind you that some of our big names were part of Urdu medium schools. Guys like Dr Mohammad Ali Shah(AO Clinic Fame) and Dr.Abdul Qadeer Khan were few of many who earned education in Urdu medium schools.

    Please please PMA, come up with proofs to prove your point. Calling names is very boring thing for me.

  46. PMA says:
    October 24th, 2008 11:15 am

    Rashad Sahab:

  47. PMA says:
    October 24th, 2008 11:28 am

    Dear Rashad: Allow me to repeat my earlier words: “Those educated in English-medium schools, as a group have greater opportunities in life compared to those educated in Urdu-medium schools and Madrassas. These are simple facts of life in Pakistan.” If you disagree with me then we could simply move on.

  48. Rashad says:
    October 24th, 2008 12:34 pm

    “Rashad Sahab:

  49. Watan Aziz says:
    October 24th, 2008 10:20 pm

    Free and public education with formal classroom structures of one to many, with many being the same age or even gender, was formulated in mid 19th century. By the start of 20th century, this has been the standard model of education across the world.

    However, this model, as good as it to being the fast food of education ignores a core problem; that it may not be pertinent nor appropriate. In US, Free Appropriate Public Education is associated with children with disabilities. In my humble opinion, this concept also lacks the basic understanding that

Have Your Say (Bol, magar piyar say)