|
Though borrowed from the West,
secularism in India served a different end. In the West secularism was creative;
in India, it was imitative. In the west it was directed against clergy,
tyrannical rulers, and had therefore a liberating role; in India it was designed
and actually used by Macaulayites to keep down the Hindus, the victims of two
successive imperialisms extending over a thousand years
- Ram Swarup (Indian Expess, 2.1.91)
The so-called secularists' voice is always muted when it comes to
lambasting minority communalism. Right from the agitation by Indian Muslims on
Al-Aqsa mosque, Shah Bano to Salman Rushdie's book, these secularists have
chosen to remain silent on the shenanigans of Indian Muslims while spewing venom
on the rise of Hindutva. Because of this one-sided tilt, the Indian secularists
have earned the epithet 'pseudo-secularists'........The need of the hour is to
propagate and promote nationalism and not minorityism in the name of secularism.
- Madhu Deolekar (Times of India,12.12.92)
|
| The Secularism as practised in our country has been the greatest curse in recent times. It
is indeed much more complex, having different connotations as convenient
as perceiving an elephant by five blind men. The best way to describe it
is being anti-majority. Pakistan carried out ethnic cleansing by genocide
and by hounding out Hindus and Sikhs during partition. The option for a
multi-religious secular framework in our divided society has not worked
out. After partition, we were neither here nor there. When we were
required to be more aware of the realities of Indian society, a few
political parties totally degenerated and joined the chorus about the rise
of Hindu fundamentalism, which according to them eroded the goodwill that
westerners had towards India. This is, however, totally untrue. India has
always had a national self-consciousness rooted in her religion. The
problems lie somewhere else and we seek to ignore them, burying our heads
in sands, ostrich – like. If Indian democracy cannot take hard decisions
now, we may no doubt further democratise and die. Those who sing songs of
celebrating country’s diversity, cannot at the same time exclude Hindus
from this vision.
SECULARISM: A LIVING LIE - N.S.
Rajaram
Religion is always a source of conflict and India, as religiously the
most diverse country in the world, is no exception. The Indian
Constitution recognizes this diversity and provides protection under the
law for the practice and propagation of different religions. This is
indeed proper. But the framers of the Indian Constitution went a step
further: they built in clauses — notably Articles 29 and 30 — that
went beyond equal protection by giving special economic, legal and
political privileges to Christianity and Islam in the name of ‘minority
protection’ and ‘Secularism’. A consequence of this ill-advised step
is a distortion of language that has made honest debate all but
impossible. The term ‘Secularism’, which means separation of religion
and government, has become a tool of discrimination against the Hindus.
(Articles 29 and 30 protect linguistic minorities also, but that does not
alter the fact that Hindus are discriminated against.) The Indian
Constitution draws some of its ideas from the American Constitution but
ignores important lessons of history. In framing the Constitution, the
founding fathers of the American Republic showed that they had learnt from
Europe’s history of religious conflict by excluding the influence of
religion on the affairs of the State by adopting the First Amendment. And
this is what secularism really means. But the framers of the Indian
Constitution failed to draw the same lesson and gave special privileges to
the predatory religions of Christianity and Islam, which have been tools
of imperialism. These special privileges, which sometimes lead to
extra-constitutional demands, are being sheltered in the name of
‘Secularism’. This poses grave threat to the integrity of the Indian
Republic. It also makes honest debate all but impossible. The fact there
that have not so far been major religious conflicts in India — other
than the Jihad in Kashmir — is due to two reasons: (1) the tolerance of
the Hindu community and the readiness of its leaders to compromise and
even appease; (2) general ignorance on the part of the Hindus of the
discriminatory nature of the Constitution and even the legal system. To
take a concrete example, there are massive subsidies for Haj pilgrims, but
little help for Kashmiri Hindu refugees in Delhi. The Gujral Government
even provided compensation for the victims of a fire in Mecca, but there
was no such help for Kashmiri refugees in India. But with rising levels of
education and national awareness, neither unlimited tolerance nor
continued ignorance on the part of the Hindus can be taken for granted.
The Indian Constitution must be revised to remove this poison seed before
its insidious effects reach unmanageable proportions.
SECULARISTS
: BEWILDERING VARIETY
Our English media has spawned
a bewildering variety of secularists whose only job is to denigrate the
faith of our forefathers. They have been described in many colourful ways
but each description is loaded with a deep meaning:
- Pseudo-Secularists
- Crypto-Secularists
- Quasi-Secularists
- Zig-Zag Secularists
- Elliptical-Secularists
- Sham-Secularists
- Janus-faced Secularists
- Fork-tongued Secularists
- Neuro-Secularists
- Furtive-Secularis
- Bogus Secularists
|
|
Here are a few out of hundreds of manifestations of hypocritical secularism :
- When President George Bush inaugurated America's National Church, he was
not called communal; but when President Dr. Rajendra Prasad inaugurated the
renovated Somnath Temple, he was dubbed communal.
- President Ronald Reagan proclaimed year 1983 as the year of the Bible but,
if Indian leaders were to declare a year of the Gita, it will surely be
termed communal.
- The British monarch is considered a guardian of Christianity even though
people of diverse faiths live in that country. The same holds good in Europe
and America too vis-a-vis the heads of state and the state religion. but if
the Indian President were to describe himself as a guardian of Hinduism, he
will surely be branded as communal.
- Shrimad Bhagwad Gita is denied entry into Arab States; but questioning
this policy will be deemed communal.
- The Indian Army has built several mosques in Jammu & Kashmir; but
if Hindus were to request to build a temple, that would be termed communal.
- Detailing India's glorious heritage is considered communal.
- Muslim madrasas, where Hindus are described as kafirs and the students are
taught to hate them, are on the increase. This has resulted in communalism
gathering momentum and the prospect of a bloody civil war ending in the
break-up of India is looming larger. But any talk of reining in such
madrasas is considered autocratic and communal.
Hypocrites have turned secularism into a joke, divided the nation and
pampered Muslim fundamentalists. But their worst sin is that they have
transformed even the most tolerant among Hindus into restless fundamentalists -
a change brought about by a sheer survival instinct. On the face of it, the
pseudo-secularists are working towards Hindu-Muslim unity; but beneath the
surface, they are pitting one against the other.
BONDS OF HISTORY: HINDU PAST VITAL TO TRUE
SECULARISM
There
has been a recurring theme in a section of our English media which feeds on two
important points. – One, Hindu organisations are trading on faith by harping
on Hinduism as nationalism. Second, Hindu triumphantalist bigotry is insulting
to the minorities particularly Muslim. How biased and negative is this analysis
and if stretched too far, as is being done, can spell a disaster for the
country. Denying Hindus a placement and role in providing a binding glue, so
called secularists maintain that their brand of nationalism holds together
diverse beliefs, languages, ignoring the basic unifying factors.
The
truth of the matter is, however, that the Hindu past is very much relevant to
our nationalism because the past is decidedly the common heritage of Hindus and
other Indians. The unfortunate thing is that Muslims rarely recognise this
common heritage.
It
was sometime back that a small folder was published by Pakistan Cricket Board,
entitled ‘Pakistan has been playing cricket for last 5000 years’ and it
showed on its front-fold some ancient terracotta figurines from Harappa
resembling something like a cricket bat.
In
another booklet published by the Pakistan government a few years back, it has
been stated that Pakistan has a history of more than 5000 years and great
civilisations flourished in Pakistan at a time when Europeans were living as
barbarians. In a book of 350 large sized multi-colour pages ‘Vanished
Civilisations’, the chapter on Harappa and Mohenjodaro, the writer stressed
that they were glorious archaeological sites belonging to Pakistan. It was
quoted in Pakistani publications several times as if it had nothing to do with
Indian heritage.
The
former President of Pakistan, Field Marshal Ayub Khan had stated in his book
‘Friends Not Masters’, that he had shifted the capital of Pakistan from
Karachi to Islamabad in view of the latter’s proximity to Takshashila and
other sites of ancient civilisation which would remind Pakistan of its glorious
historical past.
And
this is exactly what the Hindu organisations say. They do not want to make the
Muslims second-class citizens. They only want Muslims to discover their own
roots of history, race, culture and language which are not basically different
from those of Hindus. The RSS had sometime back published a small booklet in
Marathi entitled, ‘Tete-a-tete with Muslim Brethren’ in which it had urged
Indian Muslims to identify themselves with the mainstream and enjoy full
religious freedom, protection and equality of treatment.
However,
it is a sad truth that resurgence of Hinduism and increasing communal divide is
a product of India’s so-called liberal’s inability to challenge and combat
Muslim separatism. Also, this was the reason for rejection of the variety of
secularism practised so far because it has given rise to the separatist forces
based on religion and minority chauvinism.
A
RUDE AWAKENING !
It
is widely held, and not without reason, that politicians from time to time say
what they do not mean. The same is the fate of much talked about secularism
which despite privately held beliefs of individuals, due to public postures has
come to stay as the worst form of hypocrisy in public life.
more...
REPLACING A DESTRUCTIVE
IDEOLOGY
When American crowds chanted 'Evangelists for
Reagan' or 'Jesus Loves Reagan' or banners and placards have legends like 'For
Jesus, Vote Reagan', no ridicule or laugh was poured forth even in the slightest
trickle by the intellectuals in this country. Reagan's open support by so many
Christian groups possibly did not make Americans obscurantists. Obviously, it is
the power which decides who is forward or backward. If a country is strong, even
whipping or hand-chopping of guilty will get instant stamp of approval - at
least from a section of our own intellectuals.
more...
SECULARISM & HINDU FUNDAMENTALISM
It seems that our
Pseudo-Secularists have nothing to write or talk about except 'Hindu
Fundamentalism', 'Babri Masjid' and 'BJP'. I am sick and tired of their vicious
tirade against the BJP in particular and the so-called Hindu Fundamentalism in
general.
more...
|