The favouritism of one’s own community or its members while discriminating against another community or its members on the basis of religious identity are the cases of religious abuse and reflect inter-religious supremacy.
One can assume that detachment, disaster and agony are endemic to any individual, but a large part of one’s agony is man-made itself and hence eliminative; at least some of our suffering is not man-made. One finds respite in religion, art and philosophy as a counter to such miseries of life. Secularism too believes in this faith and therefore approves such religious practices.
Religion also associates with itself some ingrained problems. In some religions, such as Hinduism, there has been a relentless inequalities in some sects. A visible example of this is barring the Dalits from entering Hindu temples. In some cases, Hindu women are banned entry to temples. In any organised religion, it is the most conservative faction which dominates its religious beliefs and does not tolerate any dissension.
Religious fundamentalism has become a big trouble across the country and the entire world and pose a great threat to peace within and outside the country. The frequent sectarian violence among various religious sects inside most religions leads to abusing of dissenting minorities. This religious dominance of one particular sect over the other is known as inter-religious domination.
As Secularism is against all such discrimination based on religious doctrines by any form of institutionalised religious community on any other community, it rejects not only inter-religious domination but also intra-religious dominations. It advocates for promoting freedom within all religions and, thus, denounces inequality between, as well as within all religions.
Further, we will go through the ways in which a state adhering to the ideal of secularism need to treat its various religions and religious communities. Most of the inhibitions, biases and mistrust could be reduced by mutual help and sharing among communities. Working together for mutual enlightenment is a way to encourage religious equality. Such psyche of people can only be changed by imparting education.
However, merely education and benignity of some persons will not help the cause of establishing religious equality. The society and states of present-day times possess enormous public power.
Theocratic state is a peril: Theocracy implies the governance of a state by the head of any religious organisation in a priestly order. It leads to complete disregard for other religions and should not exist in any state. A few examples of theocratic states are Papal States of Europe in Medieval period and Taliban-controlled states in current times.
Thus, the states lacking any form of coordination between their religious and political institutions are quite notorious for their grouping, tyranny and persecution of other religious groups and not allowing freedom of religion. To some extent, this could be controlled by the states detachment from any particular religion at the primary level, however, that is not enough.
States should be non-allegiant towards any religion in any formal or legal way. Neither should they have close alliance with any particular religious group which many non-theocratic states have formed.
For example, in the seventeenth century, though the governance of England was not in the hand of any priestly class but it favoured the Anglican Church and its community. The official religion established in the states of England was Anglican religion. At present times, Pakistan is such country having Islam as the official state religion. Such states have high intolerance towards any internal protest on religious equality.
A secular state must adhere to the principles and objectives derived from nonreligious sources to a certain extent (i.e. means). The purpose behind such objectives should be to maintain peace, religious freedom, freedom from religion-based persecution, promote equality and discourage religious boycott in terms of interreligious and intra-religious equality.
The states must not show any attachment towards any organised religion and its institutions to achieve these objectives. Not any specified pattern or form is there to propose such detachment.
To further understand the concept of secularism, we will discuss two models—the Western model, best represented by America and the Indian model of Secularism.
Western Concepts of Secularism
In western concept of secularism, state and religion both hold their own exclusive domain with independent jurisdiction without any interference of state or religion i.e. state and religion are mutually excluded against any unlawful invasion on the respective domains of each other.
The state is not allowed to grant any type of assistance to any religious institutions.
State is not allowed to hamper the functioning of any religious community which is running its operations within the constraints of the law of the land.
For example, in case of a religious community opposing its woman to become a priest, the states cannot enforce its will on the matter. Similarly, in the case of a religious group prohibiting the entry of a section of its community in the sanctum of its place of worship, then the states has no authority to interfere on the matter.
Thus, the practice of religion is an individual choice and does not come under the purview of state policy or law. This model represents freedom and equality to an individual. It also grants liberty to an individual. It promotes equality among individuals and leaves very little scope for bias against any based on communitybased rights or minority rights.
However, this has few drawbacks. The focus of these states is on intra-religious domination and advocate for strict detachment of state from church to attain individual freedom. The issues related to inter-religious equality and thus minority rights are often ignored. This model does not take into account the idea of state-supported religious reforms.
Nehru’s perception in this regard was different and advocated for the state to provide equal protection to all the religions. The ideal secular state which he wanted to establish was that which is protective towards all the religion but is not biased towards any specific one ignoring others and against the discriminatory policy of adopting a particular region as its state religion.
Indian secularism in this context follows basically a different approach than western secularism. In addition to its focus on Church–State separation, it also emphasises on the idea of inter-religious equality.
Inter-religious ‘tolerance’ was already inherent in the Indian culture. Though, the compatibility between tolerance and religious domination exists and it may leave space for everyone to go together but put a limit on such freedom.
The arrival of western modernity highlighted upon the ignored and marginalised beliefs of equality in Indian context. It focussed these beliefs and helped us to put spotlight on equality within the community. It also introduced ideas to replace the beliefs of hierarchy with the concept of inter-community equality. To achieve its objective, it takes into account the following factors—scientific and rational education, legislation, social reforms, urbanisation and industrialisation.
So, Indian secularism reshaped into a distinct form resulting from the fusion of the already existing patterns of religious diversity and the ideas coming from the west. It resulted in equal emphasis in the context of intra-religious and inter-religious domination.
The strength of Indian secularism has been tested time and again in various wars. For a long period, Kashmir has become a symbol and test of Indian secularism Punjab terrorism due to communal politics was dealt in a manner to keep the secular fabric of India intact in 1966. Nehru dealt with militant agitations and their demands following a few basic rules. First, he rejected any negotiation or political transactions with the leaders of such movements having secessionist policies, using violence or raising demands on the basis of religion or communalism. Second, Nehru dealt firmly with both Hindu and Sikh communalism taking up the cause of minority issues.
India in its endeavour to keep secular fabric of the country intact is facing challenges in the form of communalism, politicisation of caste and religion, the rise of religious fundamentalism and obscurantism, etc.
At times, Indian secularism draw criticism for being anti-religious, which is false, as it works against institutionalised religious domination. It is also criticised for promoting and favouring minorities, but it only encourages minority rights to protect their fundamental interests. It is also blamed for being Interventionist, which means that secularism intends to be forcible and interferes extremely with the religious freedom of communities.
However, this is misinterpreted as it allows state-supported religious reforms. Personal laws can be reconstituted to suit and represent both minority’s rights and gender-based equality. However, such reforms are neither expected to be enforced by state or religious groups nor a policy of detachment from reforms is recommended. The state must encourage and facilitate the liberal and democratic opinions within every religion.
Other nations disapproved the Indian model as an impossible project, but India rejected their criticism to be false. In reality, globalisation has led to increase in migration and a situation is arising where Indian model could be of great help. The increasing diversity of cultures and religions in other parts of the world such as Europe, America, and some parts of Middle East has made the structure of their society resemble India. In the hope of arriving at a solution for their society, these countries are keeping a watch on the future of the Indian experiment with keen interest.
Some countries like Bangladesh have a unique form of secularism. It’s state religion is Islam and follows secularism as a basic tenet of the Constitution.
As far as China is concerned, the Communist Party of China follows Atheism, but five religions are in practice and recognised by the state: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholic Christianity and Protestant Christianity. Normal religious activities are encouraged and enforced by the state (e.g., prohibition on using place of worship as a medium to preach violence or anti-state rhetoric) for the stability of China. In addition, the religious practices are controlled by the state in China.