Secularism is one of the important pillars of India’s Constitution and the guiding light of its national polity. “In the early years after independence, it was believed that secularism would fast acquire a consensus as a value underlying Indian polity. But today it is under fierce attack” (Mohanty, 1989). Notions of Secularism are shrouded by hegemonic tides of elitist pseudo-unification forces. This situation compiles and necessities the need to revisit Gandhian principles of Secularism to revert the damage caused to the same.
Mahatma Gandhi is often referred to as “the spiritual father of Indian secularism” (Madan, 1993). But often, his ideas are misunderstood. Indian philosopher Akeel Bilgrami, in his essay Two Concepts of Secularism: Reason, Modernity and Archimedean Ideal, said that “Gandhi, no less than the Chitpavan nationalist Tilak…, encouraged the communal Hindu elements in the national movement by using Hindu symbolism to mobilise mass nationalist feeling…. his support of the reactionary Muslim Khilafat movement had exactly the same motives and the same communalist effect on the Muslim population. I will not say a word more about this since this point is very well understood by many who have studied the national movement, even cursorily” (Bilgrami, 1994). This assertion is, using the words unsympathetically, is unsound and over generalised because he provided no concrete evidence for such an assertion. There is also a great irony that follows his assertion that Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, who belongs to the Chitpavan caste.
But what could have triggered Bilgrami to make the assertions he made? Possibly Gandhi’s usage of religious terms as idioms in his methods and his continuous emphasis on the role of religion in various spheres of life. So, to assess Bilgrami’s assertion and understand Gandhi’s Secularism, firstly, it is necessary to understand what meaning Gandhi attached to various religious idioms he frequently used and, secondly, the contexts in which Gandhi defined the role of religion in human life.
Malabika Pande set to define the actual meanings which Gandhi attached to his religious idioms (Pande, 2009-2010). Four frequently used terms are explained here: ‘Ramrajya’ was used as a synonym for ethical rule based on the consent of the governed where public opinion was highly valued. Supreme ‘Yajna’ (ritual sacrifice) for an Indian was the plying of the charkha, which would give employment to millions of poor people and stop costly imports of cloth. ‘Dana’ (charity) was to dedicate one’s all (body, intellect and possessions) to the service of the country. ‘Tapas’ (austerity) consisted of burning with agony at the suffering of the countless untouchables and others starving for want of funds or because of famines. As is evident, Gandhi’s use of the religious idiom was related to issues of national and universal importance and not narrow communal interest. Gandhi addresses the fundamental virtues of mankind using these idioms and it is an interesting strand because it helps people connect better with issues and act upon the same.
Now, turning the focus on how Gandhi defined the role of religion. For Gandhi, Religion is a universal force. Gandhi didn’t establish the superiority of a religion over another. For Gandhi, “(1) all religions are true, (2) all religions have some error in them, (3) all religions are almost as dear to me as my own Hinduism” (Nehru, 1985). Gandhi’s religious philosophy was so vast that Bhikhu Parekh asserted that, “there was hardly a Hindu religious category and practice to which [Gandhi] did not give a worldly and secular content” (Parekh, 1989).
Gandhi campaigned throughout his life for unity and tolerance among all religions in general and for Hindu-Muslim unity in particular. He also envisaged the need for evolution in religious dogmas with best intentions and practices from other religions. His emphasis is on taking good from all religions, to respect all and never annihilating any religion. Saddened by the widespread communalism in March 1947, he said, “Muslims will not serve Islam if they annihilate the Hindus; rather they would thereby destroy Islam. And if the Hindus believe that they would be able to annihilate Islam it means they would be annihilating Hindu dharma” (Chandra, 2004).
Gandhi ultimately saw religion as a personal affair. Talking with a Christian missionary in September I946, Gandhi said, “If I were a dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion, I will die for it. But it is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it. The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications, foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is everybody’s personal concern” (Madan, 1993). Here we can see the firm resolve of Gandhi to separate religion and state. The universality of religion for Gandhi is individual experience and does not require state intervention.
In conclusion, acknowledging that it is foible either to call him a secularist in actual western sense or communal as Bilgrami ascertained, Gandhi is secularist in the sense that he wants to make religion purely a personal affair, separate religion from the state, and prevent the state interference in individual religious matters. Religion should be a guiding light for individual action, for developing an individual conscience and a force for the emotional integration of the nation. These principles that Gandhi apprehended in his philosophy should be taken as pillars on which secularism should be defined and acted upon.
REFERENCES
Bilgrami, A. (1994). Two Concepts of Secularism: Reason, Modernity and Archimedean Ideal. Economic and Political Weekly, 1749-1761.
Chandra, B. (2004). Gandhiji, Secularism and Communalism. Social Scientist, 3-29. Madan, T. N. (1993). Whither Indian Secularism? Modern Asian Studies, 667-697.
Mohanty, M. (1989). Secularism: Hegemonic and Democratic. Economic and Political Weekly, 1219.
Nehru, J. (1985). The Discovery of India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.s
Pande, M. (2009-2010). GANDHI’S SECULARISM: AN INCLUSIVE PHILOSOPHY. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 1124-1133.
Parekh, B. (1989). Gandhi’s Political Philosophy. London: Macmillan.
rishvanth.com 
Leave a comment