Secularism in the Indian context

Secularism in the Indian context is different from the western model of secularism. Western countries  like France adopt an exclusivist policy in matters of religion. That said, the state and the religion are mutually exclusive. Such states do not interfere in the domain of religion and vice versa.

On the contrary, the Indian model of secularism is conceptually different from the western model. The Indian state does not promote any religion as an official religion unlike Pakistan that considers Sunni Islam as its official religion. Despite the Hindus comprising almost 80 percent of the Indian population, the constitution makers have shown impeccable foresight in upholding the composite nature of Indian values and ethos. The constitution allows freedom to individuals to practice, profess or propagate any religion or not to follow any religion (Article 25).

However, the state is free to interfere in matters of religion for social progress. Jawaharlal Nehru aptly described secularism as a principle where the state gives equal respect to all the religions. For instance, the constitution has forbidden untouchability(Article 17 of Indian constitution) and it is a punishable offence under Indian laws. The state also positively discriminates religious affairs. The Sikhs are allowed to carry a kirpan and they should not compulsorily wear a helmet, whereas normal citizens may be penalized for riding two-wheelers without wearing helmets. The state has also overtaken the management of religious institutions as in the case of Vaishno Devi or Amarnath shrines.Recently the Jains have been accorded the minority status which is very much in keeping with the ethos of secularism.

There are indeed instances of aberration where the pluralistic principles of Indian society have been challenged. The expulsion of Kashmiri Pandits from the Kashmir valley in early ninetees or the demolition of Babri mosque is a case in point. While the Indian state is undoubtedly secular, the Indian society and the individuals, in many cases, are not. Since tolerance is intangible and is of subjective nature, we find that certain regions in India are quite tolerant of religious diversity while people in other areas are less tolerant of diversity.

Change, for good, has to come from the deeper roots of human psyche. The culture of tolerance has to be imbibed right from the family level and educational institutions. The educational curriculum should focus on celebrating the Indian diversity through select chapters in NCERT and state textbooks. It is a truism that India can remain united only when it respects diversity.