The fallacies of J Sai Deepak's 'Myth of Secularism'

Abstract

This article critically examines J Sai Deepak’s argument regarding secularism, particularly his assertion that secularism is a Western concept forcibly imposed on India. The article challenges this notion by highlighting that the true meaning of secularism has roots in Marathi Inteligencia, as seen in the works of figures like Savarkar, Narhar Kurundkar, and Hamid Dalwai and Sheshrao More. The article refutes the claim that secularism was unconstitutionally inserted during the Emergency.

The article tried to examine Sai Deepak’s comparison of European and Indian secularism, arguing that secularism in Europe evolved beyond the Westphalian Treaty due to scientific progress and enlightenment. Using historical and legal examples, the article demonstrates how the Indian Constitution ensures secular governance by regulating religious practices when they conflict with public order, health, morality, or fundamental rights. It further highlights the role of the Hindu Code Bill in modernizing Hindu law while advocating for a Uniform Civil Code. Ultimately, the article asserts that secularism is not anti-religion but a necessary framework for ensuring rational governance, social justice, and protection from religious orthodoxy in a diverse society like India.

A favorite notion among the proponents of Hindutva is that the term secularism was unconstitutionally inserted into the Indian Constitution during the Emergency period. Recently, author J. Sai Deepak delivered a lecture titled "The Myth of Secularism," which was published on YouTube. In it, Sai Deepak reiterated this claim and briefly outlined the history of the evolution of secularism as a concept.

This article aims to clear misconceptions about the narrative presented by Sai Deepak, as well as the general Hindutva perspective on secularism. Additionally, there is a recurring sentiment within the Hindutva thought that secularism is a Western concept forcibly imposed on Indian culture. This article also seeks to examine that notion critically.

Fortunately, the true essence of secularism was articulated in the writings of Swatantryaveer Savarkar at least eighty years ago. Inspired by his work, many authors in the Marathi intellectual sphere have presented arguments following Savarkar's line of thought. Among them are notable names like P. G. Sahasrabuddhe, Hamid Dalwai, A. B. Shah, Narhar Kurundkar, and Sheshrao More.

There is a common belief among Indians that the term secularism was inserted into the Constitution during the Emergency, and that the Indian Constitution was not secular in nature before that. However, this is not true. From the very moment the Constitution was enforced, the word secular has been present in it. This term appears in Article 25, which grants the right to freedom of religion. It was during the period of Emergency that the term was included only in the Preamble of the Constitution. However it was present in other places of significance since the very enforcement of the Constitution.

Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, listed under the Fundamental Rights, pertains to religious freedom. The draft of Article 25 was prepared by Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar.

The discussion on the secularism envisioned by the Constitution will focus exclusively on Article 25 and the judicial decisions related to it. Let us now examine what Article 25 states.

25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion

Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law

regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Explanation I.—The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.

Explanation II.—In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.

It is important to understand the right to freedom of religion as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. While discussing secularism or religion, one must first clarify the definition of "religion." Everyone engages in discussions with their own interpretation in mind. The Indian Constitution itself has explicitly defined what "religion" means.

The wording of Article 25, along with numerous Supreme Court rulings over the past 70 years, has repeatedly clarified that the Indian Constitution interprets religion as "transcendental religion" (spiritual or otherworldly faith). Indians have the right to freedom of such transcendental religion. However, if one wishes to practice religion in the material world, certain conditions and specific limitations are in place.

Careful and repeated reading is necessary to understand the true essence of this article 25. The first clause of Article 25 provides freedom to practice religion, subject to the four conditions mentioned (Law and order, morality, health, and others' fundamental rights), while clauses (a) and (b) outline six specific provisions that restrict this freedom.

The Constitution has granted the freedom to follow transcendental religion, provided four conditions are met. This freedom exists as long as it does not disrupt public law and order. Religion can be practised while respecting the fundamental rights of others, within the framework of morality, and adhering to health-related limitations. At the same time, the legislature has been given full authority to enact laws related to economic, financial, political, and other secular matters, as well as social welfare and social reform.

Law And Order

Let’s consider an example related to these aspects. During the 2006 Miraj riots, the district administration banned the Anant Chaturdashi procession due to concerns over law and order. Although it was a religious tradition, maintaining public order took precedence. When authorities were convinced that the situation had stabilized, permission for the immersion was granted nearly a month later. This demonstrates that when law and order are at risk, the government has the authority to prioritize contemporary (Secular) circumstances over religious customs or traditions.

Health

Helmet mandates are a frequent subject of debate. Opponents argue that while a driving license is mandatory because reckless driving can endanger others, wearing a helmet is a personal choice since it only affects the rider's safety. However, since "health" falls under the government's jurisdiction per the Constitution, the state determines safety regulations. This is why even after cremation, a death must be registered with the municipal corporation, and a person is not officially declared dead until confirmed by a government doctor.

Morality

During the Mahabharata era, polygamy was deemed moral, but today, no Hindu can claim it aligns with Hindu ethics to justify multiple marriages. The ethical framework from the Manusmriti era has evolved; caste-based systems once considered acceptable are now seen as unjust. This authority enabled Parliament to abolish untouchability and enact laws like the Atrocities Act to protect marginalized communities.

Others' fundamental rights

In Bengal, the Marxist government banned loudspeakers at all religious places from 10 pm to 6 am. Muslims in Bengal appealed against this decision in the Calcutta High Court. The Muslim community argued that 'Azaan' does not mean namaz. 'Azaan' is an announcement that namaz is about to begin and appeals to as many people as possible to attend. And referring to the right to propagate religion, the Muslim community argued that 'ban on loudspeakers from 10 pm to 6 am' is a violation of the fundamental right of Muslims to 'propaganda of religion'. The judgment given by the Calcutta High Court on this has also been upheld by the Supreme Court. The judgment is that even though you have the fundamental right to call to religious prayers through loudspeakers, the listeners also have the fundamental right not to listen to you. The important sentence in the judgment is that no one can force the listeners to 'listen to what you say'.

Subsection 2 states that the government can make laws even against religion. Subsection (a) also excludes economic, financial, political, and other secular matters from religion. Article 25 contains the definition of religion and secularism in the Indian Constitution. This accurately reflects the secularism that emerged from the long process of Indian Enlightenment and European Enlightenment.

The Start of Misunderstanding

The English word 'secular' is translated into Marathi as Ihwad or Jadvad. The terms we commonly use, such as sarva dharma sambhav or dharmnirpeksh are the wrong translations of the word 'Secularism.' Let us look at the meaning of the first two terms.

Sarva Dharma Sambhav can prove to be very dangerous. If the Hindu society starts acting according to the theology or religious traditions it believes in and the Muslim society starts acting according to the Quran and Sharia, then nothing but anarchy will prevail in the country. In an interview, Sai Deepak was asked, 'Religion or Constitution?' To which he replied, 'Religious Constitution.' Today, there is a demand from the Hindu society that a constitution should exist in accordance with the theology. This kind of demand from the Muslim society is not new. The theologies of both religions are fundamentally opposed, so giving the freedom to act according to their religion can be very dangerous.

The correct translation of secularism is 'Ihvad'. The history of the evolution of secularism or Ihvad should be studied very carefully. The emergence of this idea in Europe had the background of the European Enlightenment and Renaissance. The Scientific Temper is the final product of the Process of Enlightenment and Renaissance.

The Scientific Temper, the final product of the Enlightenment and Renaissance.

That is why, we must first examine the history of how and when the value of scientific temper evolved. For the overview of evolution of scientific temper in Europe we need to also examine the period of Enlightenment and renaissance. The period in European history that ended the Middle Ages and began the Modern Age is believed to have begun around the 14th century. The two pillars of the Renaissance and Enlightenment were political-social and scientific progress. One stream was the beginning of the state system running by ignoring the religious system due to the increasing and oppressive interference of the religious institution in the political system. And the other stream was the beginning of the collapse of religious values ​​based on observation, experiment, and logic.

In Europe, the state institutions as well as the general public were suffering from the oppressive constraints of religion or religious traditions. Whatever religion or religious tradition, this is an institution that controls the affairs of the afterlife in the name of This World or Ihalok.

The question of what should happen to the soul after death is not as simple as it seems. Because after death, the soul is freed from the bondage of the body, the sins committed in this world are not freed from the virtues. The fruits that the soul gets in the next world after death are according to the deeds of this world. Therefore, religion tells us which deeds in this world are virtuous, which deeds should be considered sinful, what are the rules of duty, what are the prohibitions of non-duty. A Brahmin who eats while his Janeyu is broken commits a sin. He will have to pay for this sin after death.

Religion is only a concern with the matters of the afterlife, the real meaning of this sentence is that religion does not even have the right to give value to the perception of society. Sharia has established the rules or values ​​for human affairs from the bedroom to the battlefield. From how to have sex, when to have sex, with whom to have sex, to how to divide the spoils of war, there are values ​​laid down by religion in all matters. And there is no reason to believe that this is unique to Islam. The decision to allow or not to allow an untouchable in a village into the village is made by theology or religious tradition. The decision on whether a wife should burn herself after the death of her husband is not made by the wife but by religious tradition. The decision to decide whether the earth is round or flat, whether the earth is in the center of space or whether the earth is one of the many planets in the vast cosmos is made by theology.

Secularism is the process of perceiving society based on values ​​that can be established with scientific temper, setting aside the values ​​established by religion or religious traditions. Secularism means reducing or eliminating the dominance of religion over the world. Secularism is the reliance on reasoning and logic, rejecting authority-based proofs such as individual testimony, tradition, scriptures, and words. It emphasizes the value of rational thought and evidence-based understanding. Secularism refers to the process of erasing the societal structure and values that were accepted and imposed by religion during the medieval era, before the tools of modernity emerged. This process involves rejecting religious doctrines and norms in favor of a more reason-based approach. Secularism itself developed as a form of resistance against religious authority and was shaped by the idea of liberation from religious influence in governance and societal organization.

Prof. Narhar Kurundkar has beautifully articulated the necessity of Secularism in the essay called ‘Secularism And Islam’ in collection of essays ‘Jagar’, He said, “Secularism is needed to free 85 percent of this country from the slavery of religion and provide them with all the opportunities for development as human beings. The protection (enlightenment) of the remaining 15 percent happens automatically.”

Following the establishment of the Constitution, the Hindu Code Bill passed by Parliament should be examined. As Savarkar once said, after partition, India was united like never before. Similarly, the Hindu Code Bill unified the Hindu community like never before, regardless of diverse traditions. The success in freeing 85% of the population from medieval religious constraints sets the stage for a uniform civil code. However, Muslims still adhere to Sharia for marriage and inheritance, and the education system remains rooted in outdated medieval teachings.

Fallacies of J Sai Deepak's Argument

J. Sai Deepak argues that around the 12th-13th centuries, a power struggle emerged in Europe between the state and religious institutions over control of both the material world and the afterlife. The Church claimed authority over earthly matters, asserting that the state should function under its influence. This conflict culminated in the Protestant Reformation led by Martin Luther. After centuries of struggle, the Westphalian Treaty clarified the roles of religion and state, dividing Christianity into Catholicism and Protestantism. However, secularism in Europe never meant severing ties with Christianity but rather allowing rulers to choose between Catholic and Protestant traditions while maintaining religious influence.

Following this, Sai Deepak contrasts European secularism with Indian secularism. However, I believe that his understanding is incomplete because the evolution of secularism did not end with the Westphalian Treaty. Alongside this treaty, Europe witnessed the rise of science, technology, logic, and reasoning. Religious traditions, such as the belief that the Earth was flat, were challenged by figures like Galileo, Vasco da Gama, and Columbus. As scientific discoveries progressed, religious dogma was increasingly questioned and debunked through empirical evidence, geographical exploration, and rational thought.

Scientific discoveries, logic, and empiricism have emerged, and empiricism has proven that religious authority, scriptural authority, personal authority, and traditional authority have all become obsolete. Therefore, the concept of secularism emerged from the mixture of the Protestant movement that began in Europe and the Scientific Progress that developed in parallel. In his book Rise of Rationalism in Europe, William Edward Lecky points at the history behind this process. Lecky first presented this subject in a small essay titled The Decline of Credulity in the Marvelous, which highlights the essence of secularism.

In ancient times, people were ignorant of the phenomena of creation and the cause-and-effect relationship was unknown to them. During such times, they had blind faith in supernatural miracles and divine powers. As a result, decisions in every sphere of life—politics, economy, social structure, education—were made under the influence of such beliefs. This dominance was eventually eliminated and in every field, decisions began to be made with the help of reason, science, observation, experiments, and history. This is the true meaning of secularism or rationalism. Lecky has elaborated on this in his book.

A reflection of this stream of enlightenment can be seen in the phrasing of Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, which pertains to the right to religious freedom. The attempt by the framers of the Constitution to minimise the importance of traditional religion in the context of the right to religious freedom was influenced by secularism, which stemmed from the tradition of Indian and European enlightenment.

Culture Specific Ideas of Modernity

Secularism is an important principle of modernity, just like liberal democracy and gender equality. In ancient times or the Middle Ages, society was not conceived on the basis of these principles. Christianity was given a period of at least four centuries to develop modern values by distinguishing between the earthly and the heavenly realms. This journey, which began in the 12th century, became firmly established during the Industrial Revolution, a period we can broadly refer to. During this period, European powers, seeking both trade and religious expansion, began establishing colonies across the world. In fact, it would not be inaccurate to say that Europe's global journey began through the scientific zeal to examine religious truths.

As a result, the modern values that began to take root in Europe were naturally imposed wherever European colonies were established. Values such as democracy, humanism, secularism, and scientific outlook were imposed across various parts of the world, often without adequate localisation. Two significant examples of this imposition were the Hindu and Islamic cultures. These two indigenous civilizations had existed for a long time before the European invasions. Prior to these invasions, the people of these cultures were living in contentment and happiness. Even if this is true, that the notions of joy and contentment were altered by the European and Western invasions, both these civilizations had managed to thrive.

However, these two cultures could not withstand the political, military, economic, social, and philosophical invasion of European powers which allowed European dominance over the Islamic world and India. As a result, the modern values that evolved in the European context were imposed on the Islamic world and India.

Consequently, Islamic and Indian cultures failed to develop values of modernity that were conducive, compatible, and accurately applicable to their own cultures. During the last two centuries of contact with the Western world, neither of these cultures was able to create ‘Culture-Specific Values of Modernity.’

Until such culturally compatible values of modernity are created in the Indian context, society will inevitably have to adopt a perception based on Western values. There is no alternative to this. That is why the arguments like ‘Secularism is a western concept, alien to Indian Society’ is irrelevant.

Dismantling the Religious Framework, How?

One fundamental point to note is that Islam, or any Abrahamic religion has a defined framework. What constitutes a religion is clearly laid out in their scriptures. The framework of Islam is built on the Quran, Hadith, and the life of Prophet Muhammad. Similarly, the frameworks of Christianity and Judaism are explicitly outlined in their respective scriptures. Therefore, in the context of secularism or rationalism, the boundaries of dismantling a religious framework to transition towards science can be clearly delineated.

Hinduism, however, does not have a rigid singular framework. No specific practice, tradition, scripture, religious figures or a particular period in history can be definitively labeled as ‘Hinduism.’ This inherent absence of a fixed framework ensures that the evolution of secularism or rationalism in the Indian context is bound to face challenges. However, the ongoing discourse that tries to considers a single sect, set of practices, scripture, or tradition as synonymous with Hinduism is unwarranted. Those whom we commonly refer to as Hindus today did not become part of the Hindu tradition all at once; rather, they gradually assimilated into the flow of Hindu tradition over time. Moreover, the customs, traditions, and beliefs of one community within Hinduism can fundamentally differ from or even oppose those of another community.

Hindutva proponents must deeply internalize and understand this truth: Hinduism has never been defined by a singular religious institution, scripture, prophet or tradition. It is precisely because Hinduism lacks such a rigid framework that Islam could not dismantle its social structure and turn the entirety of India into an Islamic society.

Within the 75 years of its establishment, Islam had conquered two-thirds of the then-known world, ending two ancient empires. The era of the first four righteous caliphs ended in 660, and by 712, Islam's first invasion reached Sindh. From Mecca and Medina, Islam expanded to the westernmost edge of Africa (Morocco), Spain, Turkey, Central Asia, and southern Russia within just 75 years. Yet, from Sindh, the rest of India could never be fully conquered by Islam. Each individual should reflect on the possible reasons for this. However, one significant factor is the absence of a rigid framework in Hinduism, which served as its greatest strength in resisting Islamic invasions. To ensure that Hinduism does not transform into an Abrahamic-like religion, all proponents of Hindutva must remain vigilant.

Through the Hindu Code Bill, the Hindu society has been unified under a single legal framework, regardless of religious customs or traditions. The Hindu Code Bill stands as a remarkable product of both Indian and global enlightenment. In contrast, the demand for a "religious constitution" represents an attempt to turn back the clock and revert to medieval times. Such a regression must not be allowed.

Myth of Secularism - J Sai Deepak

#SecularismInIndia #IndianConstitution #JSDebunked #Rationalism #ScientificTemper #Article25 #HinduCodeBill #UniformCivilCode #HindutvaDebate #Enlightenment #Savarkar #NarharKurundkar #HamidDalwai #Modernity #ReligiousReform #IndianPhilosophy 

© Mukul Ranbhor