Lesson 5 Debates on Secularism in India Important Notes

 

Lesson 5 Debates on Secularism in India

Defining secularism has been a tough task as there has been no fixed definition used in theory or in practice. Broadly, secularism has been defined as a system of belief that essentially rejects religion or at least forwards the notion that religion should be separated from politics; affairs of the state.

 

Secularism: The Western Way

The western notion of secularism is different from what Indian secularism connotes. The west separates religion from state. Western democracies have made this principle the core of their Constitutions.

Thomas Pantham in Indian Secularism and its critics: Some Reflections, states that, “Secularism in the west is usually taken to be emphasising the separation of the state and religion, where as Indian Secularism stresses the equal tolerance of all religions (sarva dharma sambhav) even though it also upholds a certain differentiation and relative separation of the political and religious spheres.”

Panthan also gives a sharp meaning of the term secularism as understood in the west; A clear separation of the religious sphere and the political sphere.

Secularism and Indian Constitution

The word secularism was not included in the Indian Constitution, neither did the founding fathers explicitly defined the term. It was only in the 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution in 1975 that the term was incorporated into the Preamble of our Constitution.

The Constituent Assembly had a vision which aimed at securing the citizen of India justice, equality and liberty. While these three political remains at the core of the Constitution, fraternity remains the basic aim, assuring unity and integrity of the nation with dignity. Religious harmony is one such aims that goes along with the idea of fraternity and most particularly in the Indian context.

It is very important to be familiar with the text of the Constitution as to understand what it tries to say and do. The following are the Articles of the Constitution with respect to Indian secularism:

Art. 25: Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion

(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus Explanation I The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly

Art. 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right

(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;

(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;

(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and

(d) to administer such property in accordance with law

Art. 27: Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religions denomination.

Art. 28: Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions

(1) No religion instruction shall be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds

(2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to an educational institution which is administered by the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution

(3) No person attending any educational institution recognised by the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto Cultural and Educational Right.

 

Indian Secularism: Key Features

1. Every citizen has the freedom to choose their religion and faith

2. The state cannot discriminate on the grounds of citizen's religion

3. The state shall not make communal electorates

4. The state can regulate economic activity related to religious affairs

5. The state can make social schemes for welfare and reform.

6. Article 17 abolishes untouchability on the grounds of religion

7. Every religion denomination has the right to form institutions for religious and charitable purposes.

8. State gives right to religious minority to establish educational institutions of their choice.

9. These institutions cannot be discriminated against by the state in relation to the grants given by the state.

10. In the matters of employment or office under the state cannot discriminate against citizens on the grounds of religion.

11. In the matters of admission into educational institutions maintained by the state, it cannot discriminate against citizens on grounds of religion.

12. The state cannot use public revenues to promote any religion.

13. In schools run by the state, no religious preaching or instruction can be given

14. By constitutional amendment in 1976, all citizens are enjoined to consider it their fundamental duty to “preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture". (Pantham, 1997)

The citizens are thus not only given right to profess their religion but also to propagate their faith. They are free to establish and maintain educational institutions. In the sense this gives right to communities and thus the idea of secularism goes beyond the notion of rights of individuals.

Indian society is essentially diverse and with this multi religious society, Indian secularism has become unique, the acceptance of community rights makes character of Indian politics multicultural and pluralistic and in a way beyond liberal framework of individualism. On top of that Indian secularism is concerned with both inter religious and intra religious domination among citizens.

Rajeev Bhargav has given the concept of principled distance. He explains, ‘principled distance’ by taking the example of Indian secularism which does not create a wall of separation but a proposed principle distance between state and religion. By that, it does not say that there are no boundaries but these boundaries are essentially porous. Indian state intervenes in religious matters as mentioned above. Grants to educational institutions, state interference on religious institutions that deny equal dignity such as denying temple entry and cases of untouchability are some of the examples of how there is no clear wall. The separation that Indian secularism talks about is based on principles distance and not strict exclusion or neutrality.

Indian state does not identify any religion as its official religion, but religions are recognised officially. Religions in India are actively respected and Indian secularism disrespect hostility. With this idea of principle distance, comes the notion of state distancing itself from public and private religious institutions, be it individual or community. This is done to foster values like peace, dignity and liberty. In this sense, Indian secularism becomes essentially sensitive, it negotiates plurality in groups and value.

Indian state does not identify any religion as its official religion, but religions are recognised officially. Religions in India are actively respected and Indian secularism disrespect hostility. With this idea of principle distance, comes the notion of state distancing itself from public and private religious institutions, be it individual or community.

This way, Indian secularism is deeply committed to constitutional values. But the part which enhances contextual character of secularism in India, is the internal conflict which are frequently observed. There are instances of instability and discord and contextual secularism recognises that there exists conflict among citizens; individuals as well as groups. Thus, there is a need for fresh interpretation and adjustments. Bhargav argues that secularism cannot be adjudicated by general principles, rather it can be seen as different cases and a process of balancing of different claims.

 

Diverse Understanding of Secularism

Sarva Dharma Samabhava

Indian secularism is often associated with Sarva Dharma Sambhava. It is essentially a Hindu concept. It believes that religions might have different paths but they have to reach an equal destination. Well known social reformers and political thinkers followed and embraced this concept.

It is believed that Indian secularism draws from this traditional concept and therefore does not follow complete separation of state and religion, rather respects all religions.

Pseudo secularism

Another understanding of secularism in India is that the policies have been made to appease the minority. The pseudo secularism has been used to describe such policies. Congress is often charged with such allegations. Policies in the matters of personal law such as Shah Bano case, where the Parliament overturned Court’s judgement and reservations based on religion on educational institutions are seen as examples of pseudo secularism.

Indian secularism has been affected with electoral politics and it remains such in current times too.

Problems with vague definitions

It is evident that there is a lack of clear definition of Indian secularism. It has essentially created problems. It has created troubles understanding what is secular in actuality and what is communal. Political parties use different definition of both these terms at their own convenience.

The practice of secularism as a concept in India has been essentially reduced to a viewpoint which believes that Indian secularism is anti-hindu and is pro-muslim. These differences in opinion about the concept are created because there is no strict definition of it.

 

Debates on Secularism in Political Theory

In theory, secularism is seen as non partisan and non religious, the problem arises in practices such as in India. In practice its alignment with grouping and politics of community creates issues in secularism. Here communalism implies identity based on religious community but secularism gains when they are seen as group rights.

We have already discussed about Sarva Dharma Sambhava, when we talk about secular identities, acting as non partisan way towards all religions, becomes the traditional concept of Sarva Dharma Sambhava. Thus this can be seen as the process of Secularization without which secularism is impossible to understand.

Imagining secularism with non religious language terms and symbols is important. Groups and individuals have to learn their ‘primordial identities’ and narrow communitarian groupings and see themselves as subjects of a nation.

Another such contradiction is that the principle of equality of religion is essentially compromised when the people of some religion benefit from state sponsored positive discrimination which is provided to Scheduled caste.

In this sense Indian secularism promotes religious communalism and religious intolerance. The argument of politics of interventionist secularisation made by Chatterjee is also agreed by Nandy. They differ when they make different alternatives to positive secularism. Nandy gives a ‘anti-secular manifesto’ of religious tolerance which is non modern, preciberal philosophy, symbolism and presents the idea of theology of tolerance in every faith.

According to T.N. Madan in Secularism in Its Place, published in Journal of Asian Studies, religiousness that contribution to fanaticism by making it a mere political bickering and doing so because they give no importance to religion in social life. Secularism, thus becomes an impossible credo which is not practical for state action and cannot solve the problem of fundamentalism. Madan mentioned that there lies an underlying threat that things might go the wrong way as there will be a threat of establishment of Hindu state. For Madan, the only way secularism can succeed is if it takes both religion and secularism seriously and does not reject religion as superstition also not use secularism merely to reduce communalism.

Amartya Sen defends the idea of secularism and sees it as a part of a more comprehensive idea. The plurality of the state comes from diverse beliefs and practices. The project of secularism according to him is a recognition of heterogeneity of India. The commitment to secularism includes symmetrical treatment to every religion and religious communities as well as balanced political treatment.

Neera Chandokhe believes that secularism can only be understood as an important part of historical, constitutional, and political practices of democracy, equality, freedom and rights. She writes, “secularism is not an autonomous concept. Therefore, in order to unravel the meaning of secularism, we should first try to unravel the implications of the attendant concepts that give it meaning-equality, freedom and democracy.”

The idea of secularism cannot be abstracted from the historical context of the practice of secularism. It has to be evaluated vis-a-vis the ideas which are formulated in other contexts as well as recognizing the Indian way of secularism in practice and theory. The idea of secularism embedded in the Constitution is quite close to what Chandhoke writes; the practices of democracy and the core political values of equality, freedom and rights. Secularism doesn’t need to be followed, we can simply give allegiance to the provisions of the Constitution.

Important Questions

1. What do you understand by the idea of Secularism in India? What are the debates around it in academic discourse?

2. How do you think the idea of secularism is contested in Indian politics? Give a brief account presented by Indian political thinkers.

3. How do you think Indian secularism differ from western idea of secularism?