The Curious Case of India’s Secularism

Apr 28

Growing up in India, I had taken India’s secularism for granted. Not just secularism of the state but also pluralism in society. It was not unusual for my Hindu friends to visit my home during Eids and I looked forward to visiting their homes during Pujas. Several of my family members married Hindus and although it did create moments of awkwardness, in general, things worked out well. I grew up witnessing religious riots all through the 70s and 80s but I never questioned India’s commitment to secularism. It was not until I journeyed to America and I looked back, I found India’s secularism to be flawed. A flaw that continues to be at the root of much social unrest.

The recent episode over Indian singer Sonu Nigam’s awkward questioning of the use of loudspeakers to broadcast the Islamic call to prayer (azaan), made me take a closer look at my motherland from the perch of my homeland. As an avid traveler and a person curious about other faiths, I enjoyed visiting India’s many mosques as I did visiting the Hindu Meenakshi temple in Madurai, the Golden Sikh temple in Amritsar, the Bahai Lotus temple in Delhi, the Jewish Paradesi Synagogue in Cochin and the Christian Basilica at Bandel. They all evoked in me a sense of the divine. Thus, when I observed Hindu temples at Indian train stations or images of Hindu deities at Indian government buildings, such as at railway ticket counters or police stations, I never questioned if such overt displays of religious symbols in publicly funded institutions, eroded India’s secular character. But I question now, partly because of my self-awareness regarding what secularism ought to mean.

On my social media and across much of Indian society I discern spurious assertions that Muslims are often given preferential treatment by the secular Indian state structure. If such assertions were true then Sonu Nigam is correct in questioning why Muslims should be given special accommodation to broadcast the Islamic call to prayer over loudspeakers thus inconveniencing others, especially during the early dawn hours, when our sleep is at its sweetest. I am empathetic to Sonu Nigam’s irritation. Asserting my religious rights should not infringe upon the health of others. Moreover, it is not an “Islamic” necessity to broadcast the azan over loudspeakers. The point of a public call to prayer is to serve as a reminder to the faithful. But in today’s day and age of smartphones with easily downloadable azan apps, the efficacy of using loudspeakers for azan is questionable.

Accommodating the rights of others cannot be a one way street. Hindus will have to engage in serious introspection regarding the concessions they receive from the secular state, such as the aforementioned overt religious symbols inside publicly funded structures. In addition, during Pujas, a celebration I am often nostalgic about, the tremendous inconveniences imposed for days from loudspeakers blaring garish Bollywood music to severe traffic displacement from the construction of Puja pandals, are also an irritant to many. The traffic displacements are not just minor inconveniences but potentially life threatening, as it can sometimes prevent a fire engine or ambulance from reaching a place where they are needed.

Secularism instead of being the glue that binds all Indians together has unfortunately become a cudgel. Hindus point out that the very existence of separate personal law for Muslims is an anathema to the very idea of a secular state. And I agree. A uniform civil code for all Indians is the best way to preserve communal harmony and national unity. But that is not the only source of discord. Hindus have enjoyed state patronage from the use of Hindu symbolism at official Indian events, such as the lighting of diya to the breaking of coconuts. In addition, how can a secular state order people not to eat beef because killing cows offends the religious sensibilities of a particular religion?

In India, religious tolerance is in recession. The harsh voices of fanaticism own and shape the conversations. Creative artists, who have historically served as the moral center for tolerance, have now become the blunt edge for beating up on a marginalized and vulnerable minority community. Sagely voices that call for a revival of India’s many millennia old wisdom, “Ekam sat, vipraha bahuda vadanti,” there is one singular truth regarding the Divine but theologians give it many names, are sadly missing.