WHAT THE COURT SAID "The contention that philosophy of religions would fall under 'religious instruction' is pre-mature and without any basis." "There is a specific caution that all steps should be taken in advance to ensure no personal prejudice (in the textbooks)." "Religion is the foundation for the value base for the survival of human beings ... civilised society depends upon moral values." "The process of acquainting students with basics of religions, the values therein and comparative study should begin."

At the best of times, history and its teaching are contentious subjects. And, if Union Human Resource Development Minister Murli Manohar Joshi, the unabashed votary of Hindutva, is in the picture, no prescience is required to anticipate a row.

Last week, Joshi had reasons to exult as the Supreme Court gave the green signal to new textbooks that the minister has been keen to introduce in schools. This means texts will now include lessons on religions and religious values. The court has clearly ruled that the National Curriculum Framework for Secondary Education (NCFSE) is not in violation of the Constitution and did not amount to introducing religious "instruction" as is the case in seminaries.

The controversy began to brew after J.S. Rajput, considered a Joshi favourite, was appointed director of the National Centre for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) in July 1999. Just four lines in the 128-page NCFSE document, published in November 2000, were sufficient for hostilities to reignite between Joshi and leftist academics. The Opposition was also swift to allege "saffronisation". The document stated: "Another significant factor that merits urgent attention now is religion. Although it is not the only source of essential values, it certainly is a major source of value generation." It clarifies that what "is required is not religious education but education about religions" and "a comparative study of philosophy". But, Joshi's critics were not satisfied.

The petition filed in the apex court early this year challenging the new curriculum framework resulted in a stay that affected the availability of textbooks for classes I, III, VI, IX and XI of Hindi, social sciences and history. The move to club economics, geography, civics and history from Class VI onwards under social studies was also criticised. The central argument against the NCFSE was that introducing the study of religions and religious values was violating Clause (1) of Article 28 of the Constitution which separates "church from state" and prohibits religious instruction in state-run or aided schools. It was also argued that the NCERT should have consulted the Central Advisory Board on Education (CABE).

INTERVIEW: M.M. JOSHI

"Textbooks said Lenin inspired freedom struggle" Union Human resource development Minister Murli Manohar Joshi has never fought shy of controversy, the most talked-about one being his initiative to revise school syllabi. He spoke to Associate Editor Rajeev Deshpande about allegations that his ministry was overseeing "saffronisation" of school texts. Q. What are the implications of the Supreme Court verdict clearing the new curriculum framework? A. The verdict has vindicated our position. The so-called saffronisation charge is negated. Q. Was there any need to revise schooltexts prescribed by the Central Board for Secondary Education? A. Upgradation of texts is an ongoing process. There have been significant advances in the fields of information and communication technology, bio-technology and environmental sciences. Should students be denied the benefits of these developments? President A.P.J. Kalam has written a thoughtful document on his vision for the future. Should not at least part of it be available as a school text? 9/11 is important; students should know that there is a global war against terrorism. Q. What were the specific problems with previous textbooks? A. The idea is to have textbooks that are sensitive towards the sentiments of all communities and which help generate harmony. References to one community as plunderers or another as having indulged in rapine are unnecessary. We believe in sarva dharma sambhav. We have tried to reduce the load schoolchildren have to carry in their bags and make academics less difficult. Q. Your critics insist that a Hindutva agenda is being enforced. A. Have they seen the books? If there are objections, we are prepared to examine them. Q. You had once suggested that certain aspects of social studies and history are deliberately overlooked. A. That is happening. For example, the discoveries involving the Saraswati civilisation are ignored as they are in conflict with the oft-parroted view that Aryans invaded the subcontinent and subsumed existing cultures. In West Bengal, textbooks show Lenin as the inspiration of the Freedom Struggle. Writing on history and social sciences was politically motivated to cater to Marxist vote banks. It is appeasement through textbooks. Since they have been guilty of biased writing, they now feel that others will do the same. Q. The introduction of study of religions has kicked off a controversy. A. Knowledge about religions, if imparted in classrooms, may be better than picking up information on the street or from a prejudiced author.

Yet, for a dispute with political overtones-almost all states ruled by non-NDA parties raised objections of "saffronisation"-its resolution was anti-climactic. A bench comprising justices M.B. Shah, H.K. Sema and D.M. Dharmadhikari ruled that study of religions did not amount to "religious instruction" and the petitioners' submission was "hypothetical and premature". The court felt that the NCFSE need not be vetted by the CABE as it was not a statutory body. Sema disagreed but only to the extent that "...the importance of the role played by CABE cannot be side-tracked on the plea that it is non-statutory." The ruling allows the NCERT to carry out more revisions. "In 2003-4, classes II, IV, VII, X and XII will get new textbooks," says Rajput, pointing to a "mandate" for text revision in a parliamentary committee report submitted in February 1999 by former Congress home minister S.B. Chavan.

While Joshi (see interview) and Rajput feel vindicated, their critics haven't given up. "It is correct to say that to study religion is not to propagate it, but the court has visualised an ideal situation. Given the BJP's track record, I have doubts about the Government's honesty," says Professor Harbans Mukhia, who teaches history at Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University. To the allegation that left historians have "sanitised" history, he says, "We are prepared to centrestage the clash that happened when the Muslims arrived. But Joshi would like to stop right there-at the demolition of temples."

A petitioner before the Supreme Court, B.G. Verghese of the Centre for Policy Research, points to the opposition to the new curriculum from a majority of state governments. Says he: "While the court has not thrown out the NCFSE, Justice Sema has stressed the role of CABE, and NCERT has given an undertaking that it will take note of objections once the books are available." Fears about "saffronisation", says Verghese, stem from the deletions that have been made in existing textbooks. "Can we only keep in mind sentiments of individuals and communities? The sentiments of someone like Bal Thackeray are hurt very often," he adds. Also, he is sceptical about NCERT's decision to introduce lessons on festivals. "Why should students be taught about some festivals?" he asks.

Among the casualties of the changes will be authors like Romila Thapar and Bipan Chandra, favourites of past dispensations. The identity of the new authors is now known: ancient and medieval India books will be written by T.P. Sharma, a retired Banaras Hindu University don, Makkhan Lal, director of Delhi Institute of Heritage Research and Management, and Meenakshi Jain, history reader.

Joshi says he has received congratulatory calls from chief ministers after the apex court's ruling. While the Opposition will not give up opposing the NCFSE, state education boards will be under pressure to align their syllabi with that of the Central Board for Secondary Education. The Government is not in a hurry to constitute the CABE as the court has noted "there is nothing on record to establish that in the past approval of the CABE was sought before the NCFSE was published or implemented". There may be more political skirmishes over the new curriculum once the books are printed. In the mean time, both Joshi and his Leftist detractors, no doubt, will discover other issues to fight over.