Context:

The ongoing protests against CAA & NRC have reignited the debate on secularism. Young protesters across India have brought Gandhi’s vision of the secular into the public discourse.

Editorial Analysis:

• A number of young protestors have stated that they are trying to defend Gandhi’s idea of secularism, while opposing the CAA and NRC.
• Mentioning Mahatma Gandhi in this context can be seen as entirely appropriate because, Gandhi’s contribution to an everyday understanding of secularism is massive, one different from at least three other understandings.
• First, the political secularism of Western Europe and North America in which some form of separation between church and state is required to defend equality and individual liberty but has no room for the idea of fraternity or community. This form of secularism will fit perfectly in deeply diverse societies.
• Second, the more legal and philosophical, constitutional secularism of India. This form is not only nuanced and complex but is also cognisant of the deep diversity in the Indian society as well as oppression within communities. Here, the state is required to maintain a principled distance from all religious communities. This is concerned with preventing inter-­religious domination as much as fighting religiously grounded hierarchies and fanaticism within religions.
• Finally, the secularism practised in recent times by most political parties in India, what the author labels as – ‘party-political secularism’. This secularism does not really deserve to be called so because it is unprincipled and opportunistic, plays footsie with the most orthodox, bigoted and regressive elements of all religions, is concerned solely with seeking and maintaining power, and is willing to engineer riots or capitalise on inter-communal estrangement.

Gandhian Secularism:

• In contrast to the above forms of secularism, Gandhi made secularism simple.
• All religious communities inhabiting a particular territory must live with continuing ease and comfort with one another.
• This is a people dependent notion, one that Gandhi believed was already part of popular Indian consciousness but jeopardised in modern times by communal politics.
• To counter it, he felt, support was needed from the state that is not partial to any one particular religion.
• Moreover, whenever any estrangement or hostility ensued, then the state must help restore communal harmony.
• To perform its primary duty of maintaining fraternity, to prevent political alienation, the state must distance itself equally from all religions.

Against discriminatory laws

• The current protests have invoked Gandhian secularism and are mainly focussed on opposing the religion-based discriminatory policies of the State.
• This is noteworthy on the following counts:
• The fundamental injustice of policies with unambiguous discriminatory intent. This is unconstitutional. And offends the dignity not only of those discriminated against but also of every citizen in the polity.
• The protests have made it clear that any law or policy that discriminates on the basis of religion is not acceptable.
• The whole idea of proving one’s citizenship by producing documents before government officials is abhorrent — anyone born in India must be presumed to be an Indian citizen and should not be compelled to demonstrate this.
• Article 14 provides for equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. This should apply uniformly to illegal migrants as well as refugees fleeing persecution. Either all should be given refuge or all deported by due process of law.
• No one within the territory of India, Indian citizen or foreign national, must be treated differently on the basis of one’s religion or country of origin.
• The protesters seem to suggest, that such discriminatory policies disrupt peace and stability by generating a vicious cycle of resentment and mutual hostility.
• Conflicts and skirmishes have not been uncommon between communities in the past, but a deep division between them occurred only when a pernicious ethno-­nationalist ideology was imported into India in the 19th century, with tragic results in 1947.
• The protests have also seen a public acknowledgement by young Hindus of the contribution of Muslims to Indian culture and civilisation, to constructions of Indian notions of civility.
• Young women and men asserted that their religious identity is not defined against other religions. One can be Hindu without being anti­-Muslim and vice versa.
• Indian citizens cohabit a shared social and public space not through mutual toleration but by actively accepting one another, and are committed to participating in each other’s suffering and destiny.

India’s Composite Culture

• Norms of public etiquette, civility and refinements in culture have been shaped in India by multiple religious traditions in which Muslims have played a prominent role.
• For example, the qawwali and the ghazal are as much a part of our culture as the bhajan. There is a whole tradition of such scholarship alive today that harks back to Dara Shikoh and Amir Khusro, and continues in Modern India with renowned Sanskrit scholars such as Mohammed Hanif Khan Shastri and Pandit Ghulam Dastagir.
• Finally, the protesters made it clear that an obsession with religious identity takes focus away from pressing challenges that are facing the country.
• No more divide and rule is the mantra that the protestors are averring to; the business of government is to facilitate a better everyday life for all ordinary citizens, including Hindus and Muslims, not to destroy it.
• The reappearance of secularism in Indian public discourse, initiated by young Indian students, is surely a matter of relief and joy to those who aspire to protect India’s diverse cultural heritage, defend India’s Constitution and wish every Indian to have a better standard of living.