India as a Secular State

525 Pages·1963·24.724 MB·English

by  Donald Eugene Smith

INDIA AS A SECULAR STATE

AS A Secular State
By DONALD EUGENE SMITH
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS
Copyright © 1963, by Princeton University Press
London and Bombay: Oxford University Press
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
L. C. Card No. 62-21108
Second Printing 1967
Printed in the United States of America
by Princeton University Press at Princeton, New Jersey
TO JdY VARENTS

PREFACE
THE RELIGIOUS TEMPERAMENT and outlook of the Indian people
may have been exaggerated by some writers, but it is nonetheless
true that religion has been the most powerful single factor in the
development of Indian civilization. Few would challenge Arnold
Toynbee's characterization of that civilization as one displaying a
"manifest tendency towards an outlook that is predominantly re
ligious." In the light of this fact, the emergence of India as a secular
state in the mid-twentieth century must be regarded as a significant
political, social, and religious phenomenon.
That India is striving to be a secular state is remarkable not only
in terms of the contrast with historic Indian civilization but also
in contrast with the policies of neighboring countries. A quite dif
ferent pattern has emerged in the now independent countries which
were closely linked to India during the period of British rule.
Pakistan, the new state which was created by the partition of India
in 1947, later proclaimed itself an Islamic Republic. Its 1956 Consti
tution required that the head of state be a Muslim and forbade the
enactment of laws "repugnant to the Holy Koran." Burma, which
was a province of British India until 1937, after independence em
barked on a course of extensive promotion of Buddhism through
legislation and state patronage. The Constitution of Burma was
amended in August 1961 to make Buddhism the state religion.
In both Pakistan and Burma these vital decisions, made by normal
constitutional processes, were later reversed by military regimes
with a more secularist orientation. But when functioning as free
political societies, both the Pakistanis and the Burmese turned to the
majority religion as expressive of the national identity and by
constitutional recognition sought to make it a unifying and integra
tive force in the nation. Paradoxically, the majorities in these two
countries profess international religions, Islam and Buddhism, while
India has rejected an ethnic religion, Hinduism, as the basis for its
national development.
Despite the very different policies of India's immediate neighbors,
the significance of India as a secular state must also be gauged in
VlI
PREFACE
terms of the very considerable prestige and influence of India among
other Asian countries. While the idea of India's role as "leader of free
Asia" must certainly be interpreted with important qualifications,
there is a substantial core of hard fact which cannot be denied.
As the largest and most populous non-communist country, and
with stable government and democratic leadership, it would be
surprising if India did not exert considerable influence in South and
Southeast Asia. From this point of view, any major experiment un
dertaken in India, whether it be land reforms, five year plans, gen
eral elections with universal adult suffrage, or the development of
a secular state, will have far-reaching implications for the rest of
this region.
The secular state is important to the future of Indian democracy
itself. It stands or falls as a basic and inseparable component of the
modern liberal democratic state. The secular state is thus a funda
mental aspect of India's democratic experiment, an experiment which
might conceivably break down as much by establishing Hinduism
as the state religion as by eliminating freedom of the press.
Despite the importance of this subject, no previous work gives
a comprehensive picture of India as a secular state. Literally thou
sands of volumes have been written on church-state relations in the
West, but none has dealt in any detail with the problem in the
Indian context. Undoubtedly, it was necessary to allow some time
to pass after independence so that the new pattern could emerge
clearly. While it may well be questioned whether the pattern is yet
completely clear, India's experience since 1947 has provided sufficient
data to make the investigation both possible and useful. This book
attempts to deal with the major developments through June 1962.
The problem of India as a secular state is a complex one. The rich
diversity of religious life as well as the legacy of communalism and
partition, the influence of ancient Hindu values as well as the impact
of the West, the leadership of religious Gandhi and agnostic Nehru,
the tendency of traditional religions to regulate virtually every aspect
of life and the tendency of the modern state to do the same—all of
these factors and many others are a part of the complex pattern.
Problems frequently arise for which there is no clear parallel in
western experience, which has contributed so greatly to India's
political evolution in other respects. Indian solutions must be found
for Indian problems.
VlIl
PREFACE
As the table of contents indicates, I have sought to present a broad,
comprehensive view of the entire subject, rather than to deal inten
sively with a segment of it. The chief emphasis is on the development
of governmental policy in areas which require the interpretation
and implementation of the principles of the secular state. In ad
dition to providing the basic information on the subject, this study
attempts to point out relationships, to define issues, to raise questions,
to present an over-all picture of the implications of the secular state.
It need hardly be added that the author does not have answers for
all of the questions he raises. But most readers will probably be
charitable enough to agree that asking the right questions is in
itself a useful service.
I have not hesitated, however, to express my personal opinions on
debatable issues, for that scholarship which ranges widely in the
search for facts, but which then consciously draws back from a con
clusion, does not fulfill its highest function. My point of view is that
of one deeply committed to the principle of the secular state. My
feeling is that this principle is so vital a part of modern liberal democ
racy that it is preferable by far to err on the side of a strict inter
pretation than to grow careless about it.
In a sense, the work on this book began in 1954 while I was in
India doing research on Prime Minister Nehru's political ideas. The
book which resulted from this research, Nehru and Democracy: The
Political Thought of an Asian Democrat, published in 1958, con
tains one chapter on Nehru's ideas about the secular state. Since
1956 my spare time has been devoted to the present work. A year
of intensive work in India, 1960-1961, enabled me to complete this
book.
During this year, I benefited greatly from conversations with a
large number of individuals. A few of those interviewed were
Prime Minister Nehru, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, Professor Humayun
Kabir, Professor M. Mujeeb, Dr. Arcot Krishnaswami, Dr. B. C.
Roy, Dr. C. P. Ramaswami Aiyer, Mr. Asoka Mehta, Dr. Tara
Chand, Maulana Hifzur Rahman, Mr. Hayetullah Ansari, and
Archbishop Thomas Pothacamury. In attempting to understand all
points of view on the question of Indian secularism I was helped by
conversations with members of the Indian National Congress, the
Praja Socialist Party, the Hindu Mahasabha, the Jana Sangh, the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Bharat Sadhu Samaj, the Maha
IX