Malabar History journal

According to Makthi Thangal’s account, primary Islamic education at the time focused on teaching students to recite the Quran with correct tajwid (rules for Quranic recitation) without teaching them its meaning. This learning process could take one or two years, depending on the teacher’s and student’s abilities. Students neither memorized Quranic verses in full as is common today in Hifz colleges nor were they taught their meanings. Makthi Thangal considered this time spent learning only to recite the Quran a wasted effort. In response to a question on whether it is compulsory to learn to recite the Quran in its entirety, he wrote:

“It is not a compulsory (wujūb) practice … it is very difficult for each individual to learn it completely. If someone learns to read it in full to earn the special merit thereby conferred upon him, it is the best practice (utamam). Moreover, learning to read it in full with understanding makes it complete (poornam). However, it is essential (athyavashyam) to study the opening verse, which is indispensable for obligatory prayer, and it is required (avashyam) to memorize one or two short verses.”(Makthi Thangal Sampoorna Kirthikal, 705)

Makthi Thangal acknowledged that learning to recite the Quran could bring merit, but he did not consider it obligatory. For him, the complete learning experience required understanding its meaning as well as reciting it. In his proposals for reforming primary Islamic education, he stressed that students should focus on learning the parts needed for performing obligatory rituals.

He also addressed the text pathu kitab (a collection of ten treatises covering Islamic jurisprudence, ethics, and Arabic grammar), which was commonly used in dars. These Arabic texts were written in Arabic and some of them were memorized, but Makthi Thangal had issues with how they were taught. The texts were read aloud by the teacher, who dictated meanings in the local language, while students repeated the Arabic lines and meanings back to the teacher, a process known as artam vechu padikkal. Makthi Thangal argued that translating these texts into Malayalam would save time and ensure students understood their true meanings.

Makthi Thangal’s concerns about this educational system extended to the abilities of the teachers, whom he believed lacked proficiency in both Arabic and Malayalam. He observed that the teachers often used a mix of Arabic and local dialects incomprehensible to the students, further obscuring the texts’ meanings. Makthi Thangal seems to be referring to certain words and expressions commonly used among and comprehensible to Islamic learners in the region, which differed from the standardized Malayalam that was beginning to emerge as the main medium of communication in the public sphere. In his writings, Makthi Thangal highlighted specific words and phrases used by teachers in the existing dars system to express reverence for God and describe His attributes, showing how these expressions were, in fact, sacrilegious. For example, he questions the use of the word manoharikkal, a term used in learning circles to refer to the act of cleaning oneself after excretion, and wonders if such a word even exists in Malayalam. The transitive form of this verb is also used to express reverence to God, which, in his view, could lead a person to commit kufr. In his critique, he mentioned that even forest-dwellers would struggle to understand the teachers’ language, revealing not only his biases but also his disdain for the teachers’ methods. He suggested translating these texts into standard Malayalam so students could grasp the correct meanings with less time and effort.
He further criticized the language instruction in the traditional dars system, particularly in reference to the Ponnani dars, the region’s most esteemed Islamic training center. Teachers across Kerala often graduated from Ponnani, yet despite ten years of Arabic study, many could not read modern prose or converse in Arabic. Makthi Thangal criticized the center, its ineffective language teaching methods, and the teachers’ dismissive attitude toward Malayalam as the reasons behind their failures.

His critique of the neglect of Malayalam had multiple dimensions: it was a transgression against both religion and the state. Because they could not communicate in Malayalam, the teachers were unable to engage people outside their religion. However, his greatest concern was that these graduates were not only unresponsive to, but also unaware of, the writings and speeches by Christian missionaries that criticized the Prophet Muhammad and Islamic teachings. Their lack of proficiency in Malayalam isolated them from important developments in society, which he believed could gradually erode Islam. He saw their aversion to learning Malayalam as a sin, as it left them ignorant of their surroundings and complicit in attacks on Islam. Moreover, their inability to understand Malayalam prevented them from learning and following the laws of the land, making their ignorance both a crime against the state and a religious failing. Their speeches became a source of ridicule, further damaging Islam’s reputation.

In Makthi Thangal’s view, the study of any foreign language should be rooted in proficiency in one’s native language. When asked whether someone could learn a foreign language without mastering their own, he replied:
“One may be able to learn a foreign language without relying on one’s own language, but that will be like Butler’s English or Bajari Hindustani. There is no way to excel in a foreign language without mastering one’s own.” (Makthi Thangal Sampoorna Krithikal, 711)

He added that the universally accepted method of studying a foreign language has always been to first master one’s own language. It puzzled him that Malayali Muslims disregarded this approach.

To address these issues, Makthi Thangal proposed several solutions. He aimed to compile a dictionary that provided Malayalam and Sanskrit meanings for Arabic words. His essays on educational reform indicate that he had already started this project. He also developed a primary-level curriculum designed to equip students with essential religious knowledge and basic Arabic within a short time. Additionally, he suggested pedagogical reforms, such as using a blackboard and organizing subjects into groups to enable students to advance through classes.

References

• Puthuponnani, Swalih. Sanaulla Makthi Thangal Jeeva Charitram. Kozhikode: Islamic Publishing Bureau, 2013.
• Thangal, Sanaulla Makthi. Makthi Thangal Sampoorna Krithikal. Calicut: Vachanam Books, 2012.
• Tanwir, Mustafa. Sanaullah Makthi Thangal: Prabodhakanum Pariskartavum. Calicut: Kerala Nadwatul Mujahidin Publishing Wing.