The Indian freedom struggle was characterized by its pluralistic approach and an emphasis on secular and democratic principles. These ideals are enshrined in the Preamble of our Constitution, which advocates for liberty, equality, fraternity, and social justice across its many articles. Here, equality signifies the equal status of all citizens, regardless of caste, gender, or religion.
Although the term "secular" was absent from the Preamble, the essence of secularism permeated the document, which was drafted under Dr. B.R. Ambedkar with contributions from a wide array of political groups, ultimately coming into effect on January 26, 1950. Opposition to this secular framework predominantly stemmed from Hindu nationalists, who argue that the Constitution fails to reflect traditional values drawn from ancient Hindu scriptures, particularly those that endorse caste and gender hierarchies.
In an article published on December 19, 1949, the RSS's "Organiser" criticized the Constitution for omitting references to India's "unique constitutional development," citing the Manusmriti as an ancient legal framework that commands admiration and compliance even today.
Despite their assertions, Hindu nationalists have consistently characterized India's secular democratic republic as a "Hindu Rashtra," an assertion that has been central to the ideological training in RSS shakhas.
Meanwhile, the ruling establishment intermittently attempted to implement secular policies and affirmative actions benefiting religious minorities. However, following the Shah Bano case and a surge in right-wing influence, these secular formations have often been labeled as "pseudo-secular," with derogatory terms like "sicular" gaining popularity.
Recently, voices questioning the validity of the Indian Constitution have emerged, such as when the Vajpayee-led government established the Venkatchaliah Commission to review it.
Although the Commission submitted its findings, widespread protests curbed any serious consideration of its recommendations. In 2000, K. Sudarshan of the RSS controversially stated that the Indian Constitution is rooted in Western philosophies and should be supplanted with one derived from Indian sacred texts.
Many BJP leaders, such as Anantkumar Hegde, have echoed calls for constitutional reform, linking their campaign slogans in the 2024 general elections to this agenda.
A notable response from opposing political leaders included physically presenting the Constitution to emphasize their commitment to preserving its values.
Against this backdrop, Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi recently asserted that “secularism is not a Bhartiya concept but a European one,” questioning how India could operate outside the realm of dharma.
During a convocation at the Hindu Dharma Vidya Peetham in Kanyakumari, he suggested that the architects of the Constitution, including Nehru and Ambedkar, were not interested in a secular framework, proposing instead that it was Indira Gandhi's insecurity that led to the inclusion of the term in the Preamble.
Ravi's simplification of secularism as merely a conflict between church and state misrepresents its complexity
This reframing attempts to categorize dharma—which pertains to religious and social duties established by Hindu texts, notably the Manusmriti—as a distinct entity from religion. Ravi's assertions overlook the integral values of pluralism and equality embedded in the Indian Constitution, even in the absence of the explicit term "secular."
Although secularism has roots in the West, stemming from the industrial revolution and emerging demands for democracy and social equality, it represents a modern concept challenging feudal authorities.
Ravi's simplification of secularism as merely a conflict between church and state misrepresents its complexity. In Hindu traditions, the roles of Raja and Raj Guru, and similar structures in Islam highlight the interconnectedness of governance and religious authority.
The industrialization and modern education brought forth a secular and pluralistic society in colonial India that fostered these ideals. Conversely, declining feudal powers sought to protect their dominance through communal affiliations, creating tensions that masked a facade of sanctity in societal hierarchies.
Thus, the concern of these forces often manifests in creating internal enemies, with Muslims being prominent in India and women in various Gulf nations, including those that promote fundamentalist ideologies.
Ravi's viewpoint reflects a broader rhetoric that secularism is a Western notion; however, it is crucial to recognize the motives behind such an interpretation. Many have criticized his position, deeming him unfit for the role of Governor given the current constitutional framework.
In light of these complexities, the pressing challenge today is not only the escalating hostility towards religious minorities but also the imperative to safeguard secular values, a fundamental aspect of our democratic ethos.
---
*Political commentator. A version of this article was first published The Wire
Comments