PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY IN RETROSPECT:

SECULARISM

Dr P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR

Former Chief Justice of India

Arnold Toynbee has observed that history of civilisation discloses an unceasing struggle between challenge and response. Every civilisation faces challenge from time to time and its survival and progress depend upon the effectiveness of its response. In this conflict between challenge and response, ideas serve as mighty weapons and they are represented by words or expressions, dynamic revolutionary in character. Unfortunately, history also shows that words, which are born to represent dynamic ideas, gradually, tend to lose their significance, by frequent ritualistic repetition, and become cliches without meaning, or empty symbols. I fear, fate may overtake the revolutionary and dynamic idea of secularism in our country, unless progressive intellectuals make sustained efforts to expound to the Indian community, its full significance and help to make secularism a part of their individual and collective lives.

Concept in West

The concept of secularism in Western Europe differs radically from Indian concept. The former is negative and basically anti-religion and anti-God. Marx described religion as a ‘dope’ and observed that religion is the sigh of the oppressed creatures, the heart of heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. According to Roy true spiritual freedom means, not freedom to choose from amongst various religious doctrines but freedom of the human spirit from the tyranny of all of them. Freud was of the view that religion is comparable to a childhood neurosis, and one philosopher observed, that the best service, which religion can render to the community, is to commit suicide. That, in substance, is the essence of the Western concept of secularism.

Secularism in Indian Constitution

Secularism, on the other hand, is not passive or negative, nor is it anti-God or anti-religion. It recognises the relevance of religion in human life, just as it recognises, that many citizens may not feel the deed of religion or belief in God.

The Indian Constitution has not used the word ‘secular’ or ‘secularism’, because the framers of the Constitution were anxious to avoid the introduction of the overtones of conflict

between religion and the State, which characterised the origin and growth of secularism in the Christian world.

Nevertheless, the concept of secularism runs through the entire structure of the Indian Constitution and the Indian Republic can legitimately claim to be secular in character. Articles 25 and 26 constitute the essence of the doctrine of Indian secularism. They guarantee to all religions, practised in India, fundamental freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion, as well as the fundamental freedom to manage religious affairs.

These Articles unambiguously show that, though the Hindus constitute a very large majority in India, Hinduism is not the religion of the State. Indeed, so long as all religions practised in India, function within their respective bounds, the Indian Republic is religiously neutral towards them. All religions enjoy equal status, receive equal respect and are entitled to equal freedom.

Spirit of Tolerance

This distinctive, tolerant feature of Indian secularism is based on the essential characteristic of Hindu philosophy, that all religions lead to God and no religion has the monopoly of truth. Hinduism believes that imperfect human reason cannot hope to comprehend the totality of spiritual truth:

“Though truth is one, wise men describe it differently.”

Significantly enough, Article 25 provides that the freedom guaranteed by it is subject to public order, morality and health, and to the other provision of Part III. In other words, if there is a conflict between public order, morality, health or other fundamental rights on the one hand, and religion on the other, the latter must yield to the former.

Citizenship is a secular concept and the fundamental rights guaranteed to citizens and fundamental obligations flowing from citizenship, cover all citizens alike, irrespective of their religion.

Indian democracy is committed to the task of establishing political, social and economic justice and, in achieving this task, it has to face several complex socio-economic and political issues. Indian secularism insists that in the discussion and decision of these issues religion has no relevance.

Secularism is a radical, forward-looking, progressive doctrine. It seeks to convert the traditional Indian community into a modern, open, free society. It must be confessed that, even after 25 years of political freedom, by and large, the Indian community still leans on scriptures rather than reason, looks backward, rather than forward, and has not come to terms with modernism. Secularism hopes to persuade the Indian community to adopt reason as its guide, and experience as its friend, in moulding its socio-economic structure, based on justice–social, political and economic. Until such a new social order is created, secularism is bound to remain an academic doctrine and can never become a reality in life.

Religion and Personal Law

The basic philosophy of secularism, that religion has no relevance in secular matters, is well illustrated by Article 17 which abolishes untouchability. Article 44 of the Directive Principles is another shining example of the significance of secularism. This Article requires that the State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform Civil Code throughout the territory of India. The enactment of the Hindu Code emphasised the validity of the proposition that the personal law is a secular matter, in which religious texts have no relevance, and it must be founded on justice, equity and good conscience. Unfortunately, the next step of reforming the Muslim Law, at least in regard to marriage and divorce, yet remains to be taken, and until that step is taken and, in course of time, a common Civil Code is evolved, the important Directive Principle enshrined in Article 44 will remain un-implemented.

I recognise that a hard core of a small section of the Muslim community is opposed to change their traditional personal law, and sometimes even disputes the competence of Indian Legislatures to legislate in regard to Muslim personal law. This attitude may harden, if our Legislatures do not take early action to reform the Muslim personal law in regard to marriage and divorce as a first step.

Traditionalism is not the monopoly of the Muslim community. There are obscurantists amongst all Indian communities, such obscurantism can be conquered, not by law but by education; it is in this context that progressive ideas are mighty weapons and must be fully used by progressive intellectuals, particularly amongst the Muslim community.

Law in general and personal law in particular should never lag behind public conscience, and should not go very far ahead of it either. That is why it is of utmost importance that Muslim intellectuals must educate Muslim masses and strengthen the hands of all reformers so that the Indian Parliament can immediately take the salutary step of reforming the Muslim personal law. This process cannot wait, until all members of the Muslim community are converted to modernism. The growth of a strong, progressive Muslim public opinion is, however, necessary to facilitate suitable legislation in accordance with Article 44.

The approach of secularism can be illustrated by taking three typical cases. To the Hindu traditionalists who demand a total ban on slaughter of cows and all their progeny, to the Muslim traditionalists who oppose the reform of their personal law, and to the Catholic traditionalists who do not accept family planning, secularism says that scriptures as well as papal encyclical are irrelevant in the discussion and decision of these relevant issues.

Secularism and castes and sub-castes cannot go together, and therefore, for the success of democracy and secularism, all intellectuals must start a relentless crusade to conquer the spirit of casteism and its narrow loyalties.

Here is what Tagore writes about the brotherhood of man, the ideal of secularism:

“Day and night, thy voice goes out from land to land,

Calling Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains round thy throne,

And Parsees, Mussalmans and Christians.

Offerings are, brought to thy shrine by the East and the

West to be woven in a garland of love.

Thou bringest the hearts of all peoples into the harmony of one life,

Thou Dispenser of India’s destiny,

Victory, Victory to Thee!”

–Kind courtesy of Akashvani

Back