SECULARISM — IMPLICIT FROM DAY ONE, EXPLICIT IN 1976
Why in the News?
● The debate around theocratic states vs. secularism has resurfaced in contemporary discourse, bringing attention to what secularism means and its relevance in modern societies.
● Supporters of a theocratic state often overlook the fact that secularism allows religions to remain autonomous and independent, without state interference. This is a crucial aspect of about secularism in practice.
● Friedrich Nietzsche’s famous quote — “God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms…” — is often invoked to illustrate the persistent influence of religion in political and social spheres, despite increasing secularization. This highlights the ongoing tension between religious beliefs and secular governance.
● As many as 66 Constitutions globally mention God in their Preamble, showing the global tension between religiosity and statecraft. This fact underscores the importance of understanding securalism in various national contexts.
Secularism in India
● In India, Jawaharlal Nehru was a key advocate for secularism, steering the country away from theocratic impulses. The meaning of secularism in the Indian context emphasizes religious neutrality of the state while respecting all faiths, making India a secular country.
● In his autobiography, Nehru wrote that organized religion filled him with horror, as it often stood for “blind belief and reaction, dogma and bigotry, superstition and exploitation.” This perspective shaped the principles of secularism in India.
● Nehru’s firm secular vision shaped India’s constitutional democracy, emphasizing that politics should be free of religious dominance. This approach has been crucial in maintaining secular India and promoting religious diversity.
● Unlike some modern-day politicians, Nehru did not rely on religious appeal to win political support, reinforcing the principle of neutrality in matters of faith. This stance highlights the importance of secularism in governance and the need for a scientific temper in political discourse.
● The Supreme Court of India has clarified multiple times that Indian secularism does not imply:
○ A strict separation of religion and state (as in France), nor
○ A complete non-establishment of religion (as in the United States).
● Despite this, there remains an ongoing debate:
○ On whether secularism was artificially imposed during the Emergency (1975–77), and
○ On the demand for its removal from the Preamble of the Constitution.
● However, Indian secularism is not a foreign import — it is deeply rooted in Indian traditions, especially in Emperor Ashoka’s Dhamma, which promoted:
○ Religious tolerance
○ Ethical governance
○ Mutual respect across faiths
● Secularism was also a core ideal of the Indian freedom movement, endorsed by leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, and Ambedkar. This historical context is crucial to understanding the concept of secularism in India and its role in shaping constitutional provisions.
● Article 51A(b) of the Constitution declares it a fundamental duty of every citizen – “To cherish and uphold the noble ideals that inspired our national struggle for freedom.” This includes the principle of secularism and respect for religious practices.
● Secularism, therefore, is not merely a constitutional term but a civilizational and historical commitment of India, making it a truly secular nation.
Secularism Spells Autonomy
● Hindutva proponents often argue that secularism grants special privileges to minorities and push to end the state’s religious neutrality. This view misunderstands the principles of secularism and can lead to religious polarization.
● This perspective ignores the fact that secularism actually protects religions by ensuring autonomy from state control and interference. This is a key aspect of religious liberty in secular democracies and is essential for preserving religious diversity.
● Under secularism, all religions remain independent; in contrast, a state religion allows the government to control its practices. This distinction is crucial for understanding the importance of secularism and its role in protecting religious autonomy.
● Hinduism’s autonomy is preserved because of India’s secular framework—something Hindu nationalism supporters must appreciate. This autonomy extends to all religious denominations in a truly secular system.
● History shows how state control damages religion:
○ Islam lost its integrity under so-called Islamic states:
■ Mahmud Ghazni and Iltutmish defied the Caliph and claimed kingship.
■ Zawabit (state laws) overrode Sharia law in medieval India.
○ In Christianity:
■ Henry VIII broke from Papal authority to form the Anglican Church, making himself the religious head.
● Even in modern India:
○ During the Ram Temple consecration (Jan 2024), the state overruled religious leaders (Shankaracharyas) in deciding the auspicious date.
● Raises a critical question: Should the modern state be responsible for the salvation of souls?
○ John Locke (1689) answered: No.
■ The state exists only to secure civil interests (life, liberty, property).
■ Religion, on the other hand, deals with inward convictions, beyond state jurisdiction.
○ Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island, supported separation of church and state:
■ To protect the “garden of the church” from the “wilderness of the secular order.”
● Secularism emerged in the 18th century when reason triumphed over dogma. This historical context is crucial for understanding western secularism and its influence on global concepts of secular governance.
● A non-secular theocratic state is a relic of the past, incompatible with modern values and pluralism. This incompatibility often leads to religious discrimination and infringement on freedom of conscience.
● Even if modernity feels disorienting, we must ask: Do we want to become like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Pakistan? These examples highlight the potential consequences of abandoning secularism and the risks of religious extremism.
● The answer from an overwhelming majority of Indian Hindus: No—they do not wish to follow regressive theocratic models. This sentiment underscores the continued relevance of secularism in India and the need for ongoing religious reform.
The Importance of the Ashokan Edicts
● Secularism in India is often contested on the grounds that the word ‘secular’ was inserted only in 1976. This debate often overlooks the historical foundations of Indian secularism and its role in protecting fundamental rights.
● However, this claim ignores history — India’s constitutional spirit was always secular, even if the term itself was added later. This aligns with the broader concept of secularism that has evolved over time.
● Indian secularism has ancient roots, particularly in the edicts of Emperor Ashoka (268–232 BCE). These edicts provide early examples of principles of secularism in Indian governance and highlight the importance of religious diversity.
○ Rajeev Bhargava, a noted political theorist, has extensively highlighted the philosophical depth of Ashoka’s secularism.
○ Rock Edict 7: Rejected the idea of one religion as state religion. Stated that all religions should reside everywhere and pursue self-control and purity of heart.
○ Rock Edict 12: Prohibited glorification of one’s religion and condemnation of others — a relevant antidote to today’s hate speech and religious intolerance.
○ Ashoka’s Dhamma was not religion, but ethical governance, akin to today’s constitutional morality.
● Historical constitutional milestones affirm India’s secular foundation:
○ Motilal Nehru Committee Report (1928):
■ Clause 4(11): Declared no state religion, and no preference or disability based on religious belief.
○ Karachi Resolution (1931) by the Indian National Congress:
■ Resolution 2(9): Stated the state shall maintain neutrality towards all religions.
○ Even the Hindu Mahasabha’s 1944 draft constitution, approved by V.D. Savarkar, stated in Article 7(15) that:
■ “There shall be no state religion either at the centre or in the provinces.”
■ Raises a question: Why do current Hindutva supporters not follow even Savarkar’s secular stance?
● Constituent Assembly debates also confirm the secular spirit:
○ On October 17, 1949, H.V. Kamath proposed the Preamble start with “In the name of God”.
■ Proposal was rejected by 68 to 41 votes, despite India being a deeply religious society.
○ Though the term “secular” wasn’t inserted in 1949, members widely accepted it as implicit in a liberal democratic framework.
○ No member, including Syama Prasad Mookerjee, ever proposed a Hindu Rashtra.
● Judicial confirmation:
○ In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), three years before the 42nd Amendment, the Supreme Court declared secularism a part of the Basic Structure. This ruling underscored the importance of secularism as a constitutional principle and its role in protecting fundamental rights.
● Constitutional silences hold weight:
○ Terms like federalism, judicial review, and rule of law are also absent in text but recognized as core principles.
○ Similarly, secularism is embedded in practice and jurisprudence, even without early explicit mention.
On the Jurisdiction Model of Secularism
If India is dissatisfied with the separation model of secularism, an alternative could be the jurisdiction model, followed by many modern democracies. This model offers a different approach to balancing religious rights and state neutrality.
International Examples of Jurisdiction-Based Secularism:
England:
○ The Anglican Church is the official Church.
○ The monarch is titled “Defender of the Faith“.
○ Yet, all citizens have equal rights and freedom of religion is guaranteed.
○ No discrimination based on religion is permitted.
Ireland:
● The Preamble begins with “In the name of the Most Holy Trinity”.
● Yet, the state cannot endorse or fund any religion.
● Discrimination on religious grounds is prohibited.
Greece:
● Article 3 declares the Greek Orthodox Church as the dominant religion.
● The Preamble invokes the Holy Consubstantial and Undivided Trinity.
● But Article 4 guarantees equality, and Article 5(2) provides:
○ Right to life, liberty, and dignity for all, regardless of religion.
○ Freedom of religion for all citizens.
● Muslims in Western Thrace:
○ Can elect their own Muftis.
○ Have the option to resolve disputes in civil or Sharia courts.
Pakistan:
● Article 2 declares Islam as the state religion.
● Only Muslims can occupy certain top constitutional positions.
● However:
○ The Preamble commits to allowing minorities to freely practice religion and preserve culture.
○ Article 36 ensures protection of minority rights and provides for their representation in government services.
Sri Lanka:
● Article 9 gives Buddhism the “foremost place” and mandates state support for Buddha Sasna.
● Article 10 guarantees freedom to adopt any religion or belief (more explicit than India’s guarantee).
● Minorities follow personal laws, and Sharia courts operate within civil court structures.
India’s Context and Constitutional Ethos:
● Indian secularism, inspired by Ashoka’s Dhamma, emphasizes:
○ Civility, coexistence, and equal respect for all religions.
○ Not mere tolerance, but a deeper commitment to religious equality.
● The Indian Constitution:
○ Was never intended as theocratic — it enshrines state neutrality in religion.
○ India’s opposition to Pakistan during Partition was based on the rejection of religious nationalism.
○ Framers of the Constitution, across ideologies, upheld secular values.
● BJP’s Position (historically):
○ Criticized Congress’s approach as “negative secularism“.
○ Promoted the idea of “positive secularism” — equal treatment of all faiths, without appeasement or hostility.
The 1976 Amendment: A Clarification, Not a Creation
● The term “secular” was added in 1976, but the principle existed from the beginning. This addition was more a clarification of existing principles than a fundamental change.
● The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) already recognized secularism as part of the basic structure. This judicial interpretation reinforced the secular nature of the Indian Constitution and its role in protecting fundamental rights.
● The inclusion in the Preamble was declaratory, not transformative. It formalized the existing secular character of the Indian state and its commitment to religious diversity.
● Therefore, the reaction to it is exaggerated — as the poet aptly said: “Hungama hai kyon barpa?” — What is the fuss about?
Source: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/secularism-implicit-from-day-one-explicit-in-1976/article69808105.ece
Mains Question (250 words):
“Discuss the evolution of secularism in India from ancient times to the present. Highlighting its constitutional foundations and relevance in preserving the pluralistic fabric of Indian democracy.”