Secularism is no virtue

[Guest guest]

Secularism is no virtue>Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:38:31 -0700>>Secularism is no

virtue>Sandhya Jain>Organizer>June 19, 2005

"Hindu civilization has never, even when under murderous assault, indulged

in>pogroms on grounds of faith. Hence, unlike western concepts of democracy

and>equality, which find resonance in Indian hearts, secularism cuts no ice

with>the masses. India has traditionally vested spiritual authority in the guru

and>political power in the king, and given the latter the duty to protect

dharma.">>Secularism today ranks foremost among India’s burden of bad ideas, a

term coined>by Prof. Shiva Bajpai to debunk the ill-founded Aryan Invasion

Theory, which>held academics in thrall for a century before being flung into

the dustbin of>history. The term secular entered India’s political vocabulary

as a device to>disarm the Hindu majority and inhibit expression of resentment

against>minority-appeasing policies of successive Governments.>>Given the

shoddy motives of its promoters, it is surprising that the term>secular has

come to acquire such a powerful hold over the elite. Secularism is>not a lofty

ideal, like liberty or equality. It owes its birth to>Christianity’s inability

to maintain peace between warring Christian sects,>especially as the State

itself sponsored pogroms against different>denominations. Wearied of prolonged

intra-religious warfare, France invented>secularism to ensure State neutrality

in matters of faith, and separation of>Church and State. Secularism was thus

born as an extra-religious answer to the>intolerance of both Church and

State.>>Hindu civilization has never, even when under murderous assault,

indulged in>pogroms on grounds of faith. Hence, unlike western concepts of

democracy and>equality, which find resonance in Indian hearts, secularism cuts

no ice with>the masses. India has traditionally vested spiritual authority in

the guru and>political power in the king, and given the latter the duty to

protect dharma.>>>Dharma is not religion in the sense that monotheistic creeds

are. Dharma is a>generic term for all native spiritual experience and includes

the specific>dharmas of specific groups (desachara, lokachara), which the king

is duty bound>to uphold and protect. Since dharma was never identified with a

specific>doctrine, the State was never doctrinaire. However, the State was

always>dharmic (non-secular, non-communal), because dharma is all-encompassing

and>embraces all without discrimination. The duty of the State (king) in

Hindu>thought is best exemplified by the concept of Rajdharma, which is a

sacred duty>for which the ruler can sacrifice anything. Stories of the travails

of Raja>Harish Chandra and the sufferings of Shri Rama reflect how seriously

the>monarch is expected to take his responsibilities and fulfill

commitments.>>Dharma is thus not co-terminus with religion; the closest Indian

word for>religion is pantha. Secularism in India, as noted jurist Dr. L.M.

Singhvi>insisted when translating the modified Preamble of the Constitution

into Hindi,>is pantha-nirpeksha (non-discrimination towards individual faiths).

So, while>‘secular’ is the opposite of ‘religion’ and ‘communal,’ dharma is

neither>secular in the sense of being anti-religious nor communal in the sense

of>favouring a particular sect.>>This brings us to the peculiar practice of

secularism in modern India. While the>proper definition of secularism should be

pantha-nirpeksha, as noted>previously, the media and politicians speak of dharma

nirpeksha or neutral in>the matter of religion. This is antithetical to Hindu

civilizational experience>which demands that the State respect and uphold

dharma; but this is only part>of the problem.>>The real difficulty is that even

dharma nirpeksha is not implemented honestly.>Dharma nirpeksha means the State

should be aloof from all religions or treat>all equally. The Indian Government

however, has not been religiously neutral>since independence itself. Despite

the terrible sufferings of Hindus before and>during Partition, Mr. Jawaharlal

Nehru created the false bogey of “majority>communalism” to create and

consolidate a Muslim votebank for Congress. The>first blow was struck with the

refusal to implement a uniform civil code, even>though this was both desirable

and possible at the time of framing the>constitution.>>Despite grandiose

commitments to equality before law, non-discrimination on>grounds of religion,

and equality of opportunity in public employment and>public office, the Indian

Constitution was manipulated to give weightage to>minorities. Cumulative Hindu

disquiet over the politics of appeasement gave Mr.>L.K. Advani the ovation he

received from Somnath-to-Ayodhya, when he promised>“Justice for all,

appeasement of none.”>>> Sadly, little has been done in the nearly

fifteen years since the>problem was raised in the public arena. Article 28(1)

says no religious>instruction should be provided in any educational institution

wholly maintained>out of the State funds, but this was undone by Article 28(3)

which permits a>state-recognized or state-aided school to give religious

instruction or offer>religious worship to those desiring it. Thus, religious

schools (madrasas)>receive generous state funds and the religious training

imparted therein is>considered at par with normal secular education.>>Recently,

the Aligarh Muslim University was permitted fifty percent reservation>for Muslim

students. Interestingly, the controversy revealed that the previous>NDA regime

had permitted fifty percent communal reservations to Jamia Hamdard>University

in the capital!>>> The Indian state, therefore, does not practice

religious neutrality,>and uses secularism as a tool to discriminate against

Hindus. It was a silent>spectator to the brutal expulsion of Hindus from

Kashmir and Buddhists from>Nagaland and parts of Arunachal Pradesh. It remains

mute while Andhra Pradesh>moots five percent reservation for Muslims in State

employment and educational>institutions. It has failed to end terrorist

infiltration in Kashmir, and>despite warnings from the Assam Governor, appears

determined to inhibit action>against illegal Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh.

Meanwhile, a new danger>beckons in the form of the Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Hind’s

demand for communal>reservations in Parliament and State

legislatures.>>>>------------------------------->This

message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.>>