The polarisation between the secular and the anti- secular forces which led to the demise of the 13-day wonder in 1996 brought to the fore the question of re-defining secularism in the Indian context. This has been a perennial debate because there never has been, not even during the Freedom Movement, a complete meeting of mind on the Hindu and the national vision of India. The Founding Fathers of the Republic faced a very difficult situation in framing a Constitution for a country which had been partitioned on the basis of religion and after large-scale communal violence had marked the dawn of Freedom. But steadfast as they were in their nationalist convictions and steeled as they were in the fire of our Freedom struggle in framing the Constitution they withstood the pressures of Hindu Nationalism and gave to the people of India the Constitution whose foundation stone is the secular order.
MEANING OF SECULARISM IN INDIA
The secular order in India was established in the full knowledge by all concerned of the fact that the Indian society is a religious society but multi-religious in character. Therefore, secularism in India is not, and cannot be, anti-religion per se. The Constitution accepts religion as a legitimate social phenomenon and enjoins upon the State to treat all religions with equal respect and not to make any discrimination among the citizens on the basis of their religion, faith or denomination and to maintain equidistance and non-alignment i.e. not lean to any side or show partiality towards it, in case of a conflict of interest between two religious groups. Indian secularism also implies that religious minorities being a weaker section in a democracy, their interests must be protected against majoritarian pressure or injustice by the State and the Government, through all their agencies, and their constitutionally legitimate aspirations must be promoted. The Founding Fathers also knew that the establishment of secular order in a religious society was a historically unprecedented and difficult undertaking. So they defined the secular dimensions of the State. As for the secularisation of the Indian society, they left it to the process of change whose speed will be governed by the internal dynamics of the Indian society and the play of the social forces under increasing pressure of modernisation with the growing impact of science and technology.
Those who raise the question of redefining secularism from the right are motivated to convert the line separating the secular state and Hinduism into a grey zone or to blur it. Those who make the same demand from the left are anxious to expedite the process of secularisation of the society so that the secular State may have a firm and enduring foundation. At this point in time, undue haste or pressure for secularisation may well demolish the structure, we have been painstakingly building over the last 50 years. Therefore, it is essential to make a clear distinction between secularism of the State and the secularisation of the Society in the public discourse against the anti-secular forces.
HISTORICAL FLAWS IN PRACTICE
Having said this, one cannot close one's eyes to the flaws in the architecture and construction of the secular order since independence, in terms of the conduct of the state. The state operates through the government and the administration and the latter are manned not by angels but by men. Over the years the flaws in the architecture and deficiencies in construction led to cracks in the edifice of the secular order have become more and more visible. Many innocent beginning have resulted in widening the gap between secular precept and communal practice. This is primarily because a democratic state tends to act in accordance with, or at least reflect, the cultural ethos of the majority group, if the society is multi-religious or multi-cultural or multi-ethnic. Religious pilgrimage by VIP's with fanfare, the "communal" behaviour of paramilitary forces and police machinery, support to social/cultural organisations engaged in promotion of Hinduism, performance of Hindu rituals at state functions, placement of Hindu idols in official premises and Hinduisation of public education and mass media have become too numerous to be ignored.
This majoritarian form has, over the years, affected the substance of the secular order, 50 years after it was established if one examines whether all religious groups enjoy due participation on equal terms in governance at all levels from the Panchayat to the Union and share power and receive their dues in the goods and services that a state committed to welfare and development renders to the people, one does not have to probe very deep to find that the level of participation of the religious minorities which form nearly 18% of the national population, and particularly of the Muslim minority, which forms its 2/3, is very low in proportion to their population whether it is the legislature, the political or permanent executive, the judiciary or any other field of government activity. The secular state thus fails the essential test of equitable participation by religious minorities which in our multi-segmented and multi- layered society, within the limitations of a sparse but developing economy, functions through social symbiosis is an essential test, because every social group whatever its identity in terms of religion, language, race, caste, culture and geographical origin relates to the State and to the Government through its representatives in the power structure. Thus persistent under-representation of religious minorities brings into question, at least in the eyes of the latter, the genuineness, the reality and the credibility of the secular state. The final harvest is frustration, discontent and alienation.
ROOTS OF SECULARISM - THE HINDU ETHOS
It is often stated that the Hindu order is per se secular because of the spirit of tolerance which permeates Hinduism. There is a kernel of truth in this assertion because in Dharma the Raja has no "religion". Be has to treat all his subjects alike. But the concept takes it for granted that the Raja himself is a Hindu! This is distinct from the secular concept we have inherited and which we are trying to enforce, as the secular state has no religion and it does not identify itself with any religion.
HERITAGE OF FREEDOM MOVEMENT
Secondly, our secularism has its roots in the Freedom Movement. One has to read the resolutions adopted at the annual sessions of the Indian National Congress particularly, at the Karachi Session, which defined the Fundamental Rights and guaranteed freedom of religion and non-interference by the State in personal laws based on religion. The Congress went to the extent of limiting the power of the legislature to consider matters of concern and importance to a religious minority only with the explicit consent of the community concerned. In fact, the Congress adopted this as a rule of procedure for itself in order to assure the religious minorities that nothing shall be imposed on them by force of numbers.
Thirdly, we must admit that our secular order has also been inspired by the Western liberal thought which not only gave us representational democracy but was contemporaneous with the ever-widening application of science and technology and the process of modernisation.
ROLE OF SANGH PARIVAR
Throughout the struggle for freedom and more so after independence, anti-secular forces, mostly based in Hindu Right and also in Muslim orthodoxy. Obviously, the Muslim orthodoxy had little impact, stood marginalised and was forced to change its tune. On the other hand, the organisations, wedded to the concept of Hindu Nationalism, in particular the RSS and its affiliates, have never given up, indeed they have ever enjoyed full freedom, to propagate their philosophy of history which paints Hindu-Muslim relations in gory colours and posits Muslim Indians as historic adversary and oppressor. The administrative functionaries, therefore, tend to treat religions minorities particularly Muslims with suspicious and distrust. The RSS line of thought which received impetus after the Partition and promotes cultural i.e. religious nationalism based on Hindu identity. Long before Jinnah propounded his brand of religious nationalism, Lajpat Rai and Savarkar had pioneered The Two Nation Theory. Essentially, Hindu Rashtravad sees Hinduism as Indo-centric and therefore, equates Hindutva and Bharatiyata. Its concept of the nation-building process is not a mosaic but a melting pot: its objective is not integration but assimilation. It sees unity in uniformity. What is worse, it proposes to punish the Muslim Indians today for the 'original sin' of Muslim rule and partition. Given the scarcity of goods and services and consequent shortage of supply as compared to demand, inter-group tensions are bound to develop but sometimes they spill over the limits and explode into violence. Here the State machinery often either fails or is partisan in performing its duties. The Hindutva forces have now penetrated in, nay, taken over the governance. But they are not yet wholly free to put their thoughts into action. This may be a transition, they expect more collaboration need funding and even protection while they go about implementing their Hindu agenda.
MAJORITARIAN PRESSURES
What is more important for the ill-health of the secular order is the logic of numbers which applies equally to all political parties even to those who swear by secularism and claim to be the protectors of the religious minorities physically and politically. Today, no national party and no national leader is in a position to take a firm and consistent stand whenever any issue relating to the inter-religious interface arises. No party is free from the vice of using religion in politics or religious diction in its political discourse. No secular party can claim to have given due representation to Muslims in organisation or in candidatures. In this sense Hindutva has entered the political arena through the cultural gates.
STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE
The Secular Order will, however, SURVIVE. Because the Indian society is passing through an upheaval, an inner turmoil. Suppressed caste identities are surfacing and demanding their due place in polity, society and economy. They are clamouring for recognition and for equality. Howsoever the Hindutva forces may try to quell this revolt, they cannot silence it. Howsoever they try, they cannot impose the writ of the Hindu heartland over the peripheral regions and marginalised sections of the people. They cannot succeed in blocking or diverting the stream of social justice. Each social group wishes to see its face reflected in the hall of power and its voice heard. This implies not only non-discrimination but proportional representation. Given the plurality of our society, proportionality has to cover not only the religious minority but also linguistic, cultural, racial, caste and ethnic minorities at every functional level. Politically, therefore, the country is moving under 'ethnic' pressure towards greater democratisation, equitable distribution, decentralisation and federalism. Thus, the battle for secularism has been joined by the battle for accommodating, in the political, economic and social space, all the social groups, whatever their identity.
Secularism must be seen as a facet of Social Justice as one-multi-religious dimension, in a multi-layered and multi-segmented society. Every identifiable group whatever its mark of identity must be assured due space and protected against dominance or deprivation by other groups. Indeed, when there is a definite share for all groups, when there is no ambiance of fear, when there is security for everyone, when there is hope of legitimate share in public employment; education and democratic institutions, people will develop the spirit of cooperation for development. This will strengthen both Democracy and Secularism and Indian Nationalism.
VIGILANCE AGAINST ANTI-SECULAR FORCE
In the meantime, the State and the people have to review secularism in practice and eliminate all vestiges, even if technical, of penetration of religion into State ceremonials and symbols like performance of Puja when ground is broken for development projects, the invocation to the Devas and the Devatas when official functions are inaugurated, the idolisation of Bharat Mata when students assemble in the schools, the performance of pilgrimage at State expense when the VIP's desire to show off their religiosity at state expenses. The State and the people must be ever-vigilant against the personal whims and fancies of their representatives when they operate the State and the administrative machinery. The impression must be changed that the Government has accepted Hindutva de facto even if State has rejected it de jure.
To sum up, Secularism must be defined and the conditions precedent for its survival must be found within the broader context of a multi-ethnic society which emphasises plurality, diversity and multi-culturality. Secularism must be defined as a facet of Social Justice so that the struggle for Secularism joins the mainstream of social change and is not limited to defining Hindu-Muslim relations.
1 May, 1998
New Delhi,
