4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

UNIT—5

RELIGION AND POLITICS: Debates on Secularism

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. The idea aims at creating a social system which accommodates people of all religion,
that they live peacefully. It does not allow discrimination in the hands of state on the basis of
people’s religious beliefs. Secularism is understood differently in diverse Indian political
structure. There exists a variety of stands among policy makers, the judiciary and the election
campaign politics. Sometimes, the ideas of secularism practised even go beyond the
constitutional vision which creates tensions. To understand Indian secularism, we will have to
evaluate the relationship between state and religion in all spheres of political life of a citizen.

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. This works by giving the state authority to rule and the state accepts the right of
individuals to any religion and the right to pursue it. The law for every individual is the same
regardless of different religions. 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 113 dharma sambhav) even though it also upholds a certain differentiation and relative
separation of the political and religious spheres.” (Pantham, 1997) Pantham 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. He goes on to say that beyond the separation of religion and
politics, secularism also means diminution of the role of religion, worldly and not supernatural
orientation, the understanding that the world is rationally manipulated or socially engineered

about:blank 1/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

rather than sacred and mysterious and lastly, that religions are institutions which are constructed
by humans and not ‘divinely ordained mysteries’. Thus, a clear meaning of secularism brings out
what western secularism means; state separation from religion and indifference towards religion.
Indian secularism is also different from the French understanding of the term. The French notion
of secularism which is called ‘laïcité’ demands that the government and its institutions such as
schools should have complete absence of religion and vice versa. In contrast, Indian secularism
diverges from this form of secularism of clear separation, for eg. Indian state provides support to
religious educational institutions.

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. It was interesting
that the Congress party which had its number in then Rajya Sabha in 1978, couldn’t define the
word in its attempt to the meaning as "equal respect to all religions" although the bill that had
been cleared in the Lok Sabha. It is a different question to think if the Constitution needed the
definition at all.

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. The Constitutional mandate therefore can be said to promote religious harmony and
promotion of fraternity on face of the huge diversity of Indian society. It was thus imperative to
make positive actions to promote fraternity. 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

about:blank 2/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

This is a preview

Do you want full access? Go

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Free Trial
Get 30 days of free Premium

Upload
Share your documents to

unlock

Already Premium? Log in

about:blank 3/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

(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

Indian Secularism, is a variant of western secularism but it does not blindly follows it. It is a
result of Indian diversity and its social experiences. While the original western idea was based on
the separation of politics and religion, Indian secularism goes beyond such a 115 definition.
Indian secularism is in practice an idea of respect and equality on religious grounds. To
understand how Indian secularism is different from its western form is easy to find in the matters
of personal law. Religious affairs in India continue to have authority over people in that way. It is
a unique feature of Indian politics where different laws are applicable to individuals of different
religions. Indian secularism gives incentives to support different institutions even as financial
aids. Some of the key features of Indian secularism are as follows:

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.

about:blank 4/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

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 116 domination
among citizens. Therefore, Indian secularism is nothing like western secularism and does not
have a clear separation of religion and politics. Rather, it has ‘principled distance’ between
religion and politics.

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

about:blank 5/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

This is a preview

Do you want full access? Go

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Free Trial
Get 30 days of free Premium

Upload
Share your documents to

unlock

Already Premium? Log in

about:blank 6/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

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. On the other hand, BJP has
been accused of presenting a communal narrative in Indian politics. 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. There exists a
debate among the political thinkers in Indian discourse as well which will be dealt with in the
next section.

DEBATES ON SECULARISM IN POLITICAL THEORY

Uphadhay and Robinson in Revisiting communalism and Fundamentalism in India, writes about
the four strands of debates of secularism in academic discourse in India; classical, soft Hindu
state, hard Hindu position and attempts to go beyond secularism and religion. The classical,
looks at it in terms of modernity and individuals who emerged to be secularized. They were
basically leaving aside identities and participated in the modernist project. Nehru’s vision of
secularism covers in this branch. Uphadhay writes, “Akeel Bilgrami calls Nehru vian secularism
‘Archimedean’, that is legislated as priori from above and beyond the socio-political fray, rather
than the outcome of the negotiations and debate within civil society among various religious and
other communitarian groups.”(Upadhaya, 2012) Secondly, thinkers such as Madan forward an
argument of secularism which talks about attachment to religion identify and that it has to be

about:blank 7/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

acknowledged in public sphere. According to Madan, Upadhyaya writes, “Madan asserts that
secularism is a social myth. Madan argues that in India a secular state cannot survive because the
recognition of secularism as a social and political value is limited.” Such positions can be
understood as soft Hindu positions. Hard Hindu position includes the vision which problematizes
secularism. Nandy calls ‘Secularism is dead’. He essentially refers to the philosophy of
secularism and the gaps there exist in theory and practice.

In theory, secularism is seen as nonpartisan and nonreligious, 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 nonpartisan 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. Upadhaya writes, “The challenge of actualizing it
through concrete social, political, economic and educational measures is an enormous task.”
(Upadhyay, 2012) Imagining secularism with nonreligious 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.

Thinkers such as Ashish Nandy, Partha Chatterjee and T.N. Madan have a strong criticism of
Hindu nationalism as well as present a critic of secularism in Indian state in theory and practice.

Partha Chatterjee and TN. Madan have talked about ‘positive secularism’. They criticize the
ideology by saying that setting up of a positively secular state, India has been brought to a
‘potentially disastrous’ political impasse. This positivism is seen along with the campaign of the
Hindu right. Chatterjee questions the modernist mission of secularization. The mission included
two projects; separation of politics and religion and reformist intervention of state in the sphere
of socio-religious of mostly Hindu politics. (Pantham, 1997)

Chatterjee sees, this intervention as a violation of the principles of secularism. Thus, the claim
based on non religiousness cannot be made by the state which decides to reform personal laws of
Hindy and cannot be justified as public interest. Another such contradiction is that the principle

about:blank 8/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

This is a preview

Do you want full access? Go

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Free Trial
Get 30 days of free Premium

Upload
Share your documents to

unlock

Already Premium? Log in

about:blank 9/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

the perverse gifts or inevitable product of western modernity. Nandy forwards an alternative
which is ethico-politically appropriate in the non modern, presecular conception of religions
where religions are accommodative, tolerant ways of life like the ones practiced by Ashok, Akbar
and Gandhi. (Nandy, 1988).

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. (Madan, 1987)

He also talks about Gandhi who emphasised that religion and politics cannot be separated as it
opens an understanding of interreligious harmony.

In Chatterjee's view, an appropriate alternatively or rather the way forward has to be built a
proper relationship between the state and the religious, ethnic and cultural groups. Thus, in a
way, moving towards acknowledging group rights and moving beyond the 6-state sovereignty vs
individual rights dominant in liberal discourse. Chatterjee in calling for toleration recognises it
as, "would be premised on autonomy and respect for persons, but it would be sensitive to the
varying political salience of the institutional contents in which reasons are debated." (Chatterjee,
1994)

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 120 commitment to secularism
includes symmetrical treatment to every religion and religious communities as well as balanced
political treatment. (Chandhoke, 2010)

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

about:blank 10/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

about:blank 11/12
4/21/24, 11:52 AM Debates on Secularism

This is a preview

Do you want full access? Go

Access to all documents

Get Unlimited Downloads

Improve your grades

Free Trial
Get 30 days of free Premium

Upload
Share your documents to

unlock

Already Premium? Log in

about:blank 12/12