Lecture: The Crisis of Indian Secularism, Modern Myth Locked Mind, Secularism and Fundamentalism, TN Madan, 1997
Keywords: Ambedkar, Article 370, Gandhi, Hindu, Jinnah, Kashmir, Majority, Minority, Muslim, Nehru, Secularism, T. N. Madan
University of Delhi
Bachelor of Arts
Sociology of India
Reading to be Covered: Madan, T. N., 1997, Modern Myth, Locked Minds: Secularism and Fundamentalism in India, Delhi: Oxford, Chapter 8: The Crisis of Indian Secularism, pp. 233-265
Course Structure
Important points to be kept in mind while studying the article
Expected outcome
Lecture in detail with comment and clarification
Introduction
Three Basic Assumptions of the Secularism
A Gandhian Perspective of Secularism
Secularism is Inherently Unstable
Nehru on Religion, Politics and Secularism
Secularism and the Constitution and Ambedkar
Role of Dr B. R. Ambedkar
The Majority-Minority Conundrum
Why Hindu Muslim Treated Differently by the Sate
Casteist Politics or Secular Politics
Concluding Remarks
-Importance of Symbolism
Important Points to be Kept in Mind While Studying the Article
Pay attention to the root of the secularism in India. Their debate and how the secularism was shaped in India by Nehru, Ambedkar and other people.
Expected outcome
Students will be able to understand the root or crisis of secularism in India. How Nehru and Ambedkar tried to make India as a secular country, Nehru through their administrative decisions and Ambedkar as an architecture of the constitution. The student will also understand the various approached of the secularism and their practice.
Introduction
“India will be a land of many faiths, equally honoured and respected, but of one national outlook.” – Jawaharlal Nehru, 24 January 1948
This article is about the nature of secularism in India. However, the author has also posed some critical question on secularism and tried to find the ideology behind it.
Three Basic Assumptions of the Secularism
For TN Madan there are three basic assumptions of the secularism, these are -
The first assumption is that secularism is an anti-religious or non-religious and this is cultural specific expression. They also think that secularism is not an Indian ideology but, there is an Indian ideology of secularism. The general theory of secularism, it is asserted, has been historically validated by the experience ad achieved of the so-called modern societies of the West in the last four hundred years, and it should have successes in India too. Pg. 233
The second assumption is secularism will be welcome by all right-thinking persons, for it shows the way to the making of rational plans for social reconstruction and state action, placing ultimate faith in the adequately of human agency.
The third assumption is that, with appropriate corrective measures, ideological secularism can still be made to success in India, notwithstanding all the faltering of the last five decades. Pg. 234
A Gandhian Perspective of Secularism
Secularism in Indian is a multivocal word, what it means depends upon who uses the word and in what context. There is no single or straight answer to the question as to why secularism in India has run into difficulties.
The author T. N. Madan begins with Mahatma Gandhi and refers to him as a “spiritual father of Indian secularism”. Gandhi was holistic with religious as its constitutive principle – as the source of value for judging the worth of all worldly goals and actions. Religion here means, above all, altruism (sevadharma), self-assurance arising here inner conviction (atmatushti), and the putting of one’s faith in the saving grace o God (Rama Nama).
For author Gandhi observed ‘every, the tiniest, activity is governed by what I consider my religion. Pg. 235
For Bhikhu Paresh, Gandhi secularized Hinduism as much as it was possible to do within a spiritual framework. Gandhi balanced between sacred and secular, and religion and politics. He emphasised on citizen’s sense of moral responsibility. Pg. 236
For Gandhi religion and state are two different things. For him, religion is a personal affair and the state has nothing to do with it.
Secularism is Inherently Unstable
PROBLEM OF SECULARISM IS PROBLEM OF VALUE, both Gandhi and Max Weber are agreed here. They have said the similar thing is that a secularized world is inherently unstable because it elevates to the realm of ultimate values the only values it knows and these are instrumental values. ‘Natural science’, Weber said, ‘gives us an answer to the question of what we must do if we wish to master life technically. It leaves quite aside, or assume for its purposes, whether we should and do wish to master life technically and whether it ultimately makes sense to do so’. Pg. 237
Nehru on Religion, Politics and Secularism
Nehru was against institutional religion, ritual and mysticism and did not consider a religious person. Pg. 238
Nehru wrote that ‘I felt angry with Gandhi at his religious and sentimental approach to a political question and his frequent reference to God in connection with it’. Pg. 239
He was against the mixing up politics with religion like Gandhi. Therefore he has said that if religion interferes everything in including politics then it will not merely question of divorcing it from politics, but of divorcing it from life itself.
For Nehru, there is no question of the problem of Hindu Muslim. He also declared this In Lucknow Congress (1936). Pg 240
For T. N. Madan Nehru’s view on religion was Marxist. As Marx and Engels have discussed and observed about the role of ideologies in The German Ideology, that any attempt to understand an epoch of history in terms of political and religious issues is to ‘share the illusion of the epoch’ (Marx and Engels: 1959: 259). Pg. 241- 242
The Indian constitution to promoting the secularism even it was not mentioned in the original one. However, H. V. Kamath was proposed to constitution begin with “in the name of God” which was rejected by the chair of the drafting committee Dr B. R. Ambedkar, and it starts with “we the people of India”. Pg. 243
Nehru defines the secular state in terms of religious pluralism and gave primacy of the economic over the religious factors. Pg. 244
Nehru believes in ‘creating a just state by just means’. And secularism must be communicated to the people in the language of the mind and the heart ... the language which grows from a complex of associations of past history and culture and present environment. Pg. 245
There were two views on secularism and state of Gandhi and Nehru.
For Gandhi, religious pluralism entailed inter-religious understanding and mutual respect; it was the strength of Indian society while communal politics tied to statism would be its bane.
For Nehru, religiosity and the attendant conflict were the badges of social backwardness.
Secularism in the sense of neutrality as state policy was a strategy to cope with a difficult situation. And the state policy was a strategy to cope with a difficult situation.
The biographer of both Gandhi and Nehru B. R. Nanda wrote that ‘the working partnership of Nehru and Gandhi lasted till the end, but their philosophies of life never really converged’. Pg. 246
Secularism is not new for India. The great Ancient emperor Ashok and medieval emperor Akbar receives the highest honour. In modern India Nehru focus on the state-sponsored economic growth for key social development. He uses to call new factories, dams etc as ‘India’s new temple’. Pg. 247
Secularism and the Constitution and Ambedkar
Nehru put his faith in the Constitution and the legislative process.
However, he failed to implement the constitution during his tenure as prime minister.
T. N. Madan is saying that he did not implement the directive principle and state policy like the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) because of resistance come from the Muslim community.
DEAR STUDENTS Nehru also failed to implement the universal compulsory education for all. Pg. 248
Even Sariya Law for Muslim was rejected in the constituent assembly in 1848 as per T. N. Madan. Pg. 249
Nehru showed a much greater willingness to oppose what he considered reactionary element among the Hindu than among the other communities.
Role of Dr B. R. Ambedkar
However Nehru and because of him, president Rajendra Prasad opposed some progressive laws like Hindu Code Bill proposed by the then law minister Dr B. R. Ambedkar.
Other laws passed despite the opposition of Prime Minister Nehru and President Rajendra Prasad like Including other progressive bills like The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and the Hindu Adoption and Maintainance Act, 1956.
In the above examples, Nehru showed his un-progressive approach toward society. Pg. 150
The Majority-Minority Conundrum
Like Prime Minister Nehru, later on, Prime Minister Rajeev Gandhi too promoted the Muslim orthodox. Rajiv Gandhi rushed through Parliament for Muslim Women (Protection of Rights) Act in 1986, to nullify the Supreme Court’s verdict in the Shah Bano case upholding the legal liability of a Muslim male to provide maintained support for the wife he divorces. Pg. 250
Why Hindu Muslim Treated Differently by the Sate
Author T. N. Madan raises the question that “why did Nehru treated Hindu and Muslim differently? And why have a successive government at the Centre since Nehru’s death in 1964 often done so?”
T. N. Madan is saying that this discriminatory between the different religious groups and this is violating the principle of secularism of Constitution.
T. N. Madan is also giving the possible answer for this-
The answer seems to me (T. N. Madan), lies largely in the fact that, as observed earlier, non-discrimination may be sufficient to meet the requirement of the situation. The anxieties and sensitivities of minorities must be recognized. But where does the stat draw the line? There is no easy answer to this question. Consequently, the majority-minority conundrum has become an almost insoluble problem.
In a democratic polity being in a majority betokens public approval and signifies legitimate electoral success or the group concerned. Such majorities represent interest groups and ideological positions.
In Thomas Jefferson’s celebrated phrase, ‘the will of the majority’ is the Natural law of every society’ and ‘the only guardian of the rights of man’.
The majority-minority differentiation in religious term has thus become an integral part of the Indian political rhetoric: it is the language of communalism rather than liberalism. Pg.251
During British India when the British Government come with some electoral reform the Muslim leaders opposed it by saying that this is against the Muslim and it will promote the majority Hindi rule over the Muslim. T. N. Madan has said that first Sayid Ahmad Khan and Amir Ali (1883) and later on M. A. Jinnah (1942) promoted the two-nation theory on the basis of religion. Pg. 252
On the basis of two-nation theory, Sayyid Ahmad put forward the notion of ‘separate electorates’, based on religious identity, toward the end of the nineteenth century. Jinnah too echoing Sayyid Ahmad’s ‘game of dice’ while addressing the All India Muslim League in Lahore in 1940. Pg. 253
Article 29 and 40 are especially referring to the rights of monitory as fundamental rights. Pg. 254
T. N. Mandan observed that rights in the constitution are looks like protection of human rights rather than minority rights. Pg. 255
DEAR STUDENTS Author is further raising the question over the idea of minority and majority in India. He gave the example of the violent student agitation against the Mandal Commission Recommendation in 1990. T. N. Madan comes to support for reservation on the basis of economic criteria. He also seems unhappy with reservation cleverly. T. N. Madan is mixing the reservation with the secularism, communalism and non-discriminatory policy of the state. Modern India and Indian constitution is committed for social justice. Hence the hidden idea of T. N. Madan is NOT ACCEPTED HERE. Pg. 256
DEAR STUDENTS T. N. Madan is linking provision of Article 370 for Jammu and Kashmir, and Muslim majority in Kashmir with Two Nation Theory, and theory of the creation of Pakistan. THIS LINKAGE AND ARGUMENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. (Note: Article 370 has removed from Jammu and Kashmir in 2019.) Further is a discussion about Jammu and Kashmir. He mentioned that Abdullah is not the universally honoured leader of the Muslim masses of Kashmir (pg. 258). This is not so important, no leaders have ever universally accepted in any community or nation. pg. 257 – 258 – 259
Author T. N. Madan is saying that secularism is dying in Jammu and Kashmir but that is not the only sight. The secularism is also dying in the Ayodhya by the demolition of the Babari Masjid in 1992, by Rashtriya Svwamsevak Sangh (RSS) and later violence in Bombay (now Mumbai) by Muslim. Pg. 259
T. N. Madan is saying that this is not clear that Hindutva appeal (and demolition of Babari Masjid) was behind the nationwide success and defeated of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the election. I THINK T. N. MADAN IS DELEBRATEY SHOWING HIMSELF AS AN INNOCENT PERSON WHO DOESN’T KNOWS ABOUT THIS.
Casteist Politics or Secular Politics
This is said that it was the victory of secular politics in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar after the demolition of the Babasi Masjid. T. N. Madan is saying that that was not a secular politics rather a casteist politics. Without taking the name of Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad Yadav he is saying that, that was caste solidarity rather than religious identity. Further is saying that that coalition between the particular caste and Muslim was against the Hindu upper caste.
He also mentioned that the coalition between Shiv Sena and the Bharatiya Janata Party was dangerous in Maharashtra. Pg. 260
Concluding Remarks
Secularism is an explicitly formulated ideology was born of the dialectic of religion and science and was not simply an anti-religious ideology, thought many intellectuals have desired and even believed it to be so.
It is important to recognize that one of the major reasons for the rise of religious fundamentalism all over the world today is excesses of ideological secularism, and its emergence as dogma, or a religion, just as Karl Marx and Max Weber, and some other theorist had anticipated. Pg. 260
T. N. Madan is saying that the temple and the mosque lovers of today’s are, first and foremost, power-hungry politicians. T. N. Madan further days that religion in the hand of politician no longer is concerned with value, but only with the instrument; that us, religion is a means among other for the achievement of whatever goals are adopted.
T. N. Madal raises the question that if secularism is not essentially anti-religious, but only against revelation and unreason, Indian secularism with its ideal of respect for all religious would be much less so. Why then did Nehru complain to Malraus that it was difficult to establish a secular state in a religious country such as India?
T. N. Madan is also giving the answer to his own question. He is saying that my main argument is that neither India’s indigenous religious traditions, not Islam recognize the sacred-secular dichotomy in the manner Christianity do so and therefore, the modern process of secularization (in the sense of expanding human control over human lives) proceed in India without the support of an ideology that people, in general, may warn up to such as one legitimized by religion. Pg. 261
The Indic religious traditions are more or less open to questioning from within and reformulation through interpretation.
Islam and Christianity are non-indigenous in origins, but can hardly be considered alien today. It may not be denied that there is a significant theological, metaphysical, cognitive, and ethical difference between Indic and classical Islamic worldviews. Pg. 262
At the same time, we have to recognise, first the limitations of ambiguous concept of pluralism and, then the real danger of Hindu communalism and the insensitivity of the Hindu generally to the feeling of those who consider themselves non-Hindu.
Gandhi no less than Nehru was conscious of the greater harm that majority communalism might do in India thought neither could be said to have approved of minority communalism.
DEAR STUDENTS T. N. Madan also giving the example of the emergency regime by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in by calling it totalitarian regime and relating it with caste and communal violence in the state WHICH NOT LOOKS LIKE A SUITABLE REFERENCE FOR ME. Pg. 263
Importance of Symbolism
For T. N. Madan it may be argued that Nehru failed to realise fully the importance of the symbolism of the sacred in a secular society.
Nehru’s reference to the dams and factories of modern India as ‘Temple’ showed his awareness of the symbolic value of the sacred, but perhaps, he remained content with too little value of the sacred but perhaps, he remained content with too little. For example, US president always uses to recognise the religious foundations of the American societies, where the president may not be religious, they call it ‘civil religion’.
FOR EXAMPLE, US President Barak Obama had to accept many times that he is religious and believe in the Bible. Pg. 264
The future on India as a civil society, and the character of its polity in the years to come, are as yet far from a settled issue. All those who cherish the value of democracy and cultural pluralism of human freedom and dignity – can hardly afford to be complacent.
Image Description: Worship of Sun A “house altar” depicting Akhenaten, Nefertiti and three of their daughters, 1350 BC, Credit Museum Berlin, Copyright Under License of PD-US
Anil Kumar, PhD Student of Social Sciences
Anil Kumar | Student of Life World
Stay Social ~ Stay Connected
Study with Anil
Lecture, Study Material, and More
Keep Visiting ~ Stay Curious
0 Comments