Secularism: A treacherous game of narrative and numbers

Recently a PIL urging the Supreme Court to grant minority status to the Hindus in eight states, where their numerical strength is less than their co-religionists, was rejected. But the issue deserves a serious discourse on the narratives behind the numbers. If number takes primacy then secularism would be turned into a game of dice. Therefore, secularisation of communities depends on a narrative which dilutes the gap of numerical strength between communities. A truly secular society minimises the differences and maximises common grounds to foster fraternity. Unlike in other parts of the globe where faith has been reason for clash and competition to establish hegemony, the Indian situation has been from time immemorial altogether different. 

This can be best illustrated by the remark of the census commissioner in the 1911 census report that “the Hindus do not care about their neighbour’s region”. But this has not been the case in Europe. The Western view of secularism presumes, as human rights activist BG Verghese had rightly said, that the concept of minority reminds one of the presence of brute majority. It would be inappropriate to adjust and accommodate India in the European definition and practices of secularism. Therefore, the majority-minority dichotomy or division needs to be re-examined in the light of our own historical experiences and world view.

The Constituent Assembly debate is highly illuminating in this regard. There was a constructive debate on the concepts of majority and minority, which was considered the basis of the British policy of divide and rule, and the members collectively realised its unworthiness. Tajamul Hussain, President of Bihar Muslim League, categorically said during the debate in the Assembly that the concept of religious minority was the British creation as India had no history of Hindus persecuting non-Hindus or denying freedom of religion. It was this creed which guaranteed thousands of Jews and Parsis, who came to India for their protection, faced no treat on their faith. There were more than one lakh Parsis in the country in 1931 census.

During the colonial period, Hindus were facing severe threats of religious conversions both from Christianity and Islam. Successive census reports of the era mentioned Hindus losing their numbers due to conversions.  But the game of numbers could not change the Hindus’ narrative for religions. 

The 1921 census report created an equivalence between the Hindu world view and the description of the pre-Semitic world by historian Edward Gibbon, the author of The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. He attributed to Roman civilisation, “the deities of a thousand groves and a thousand streams  possessed in peace their local and respective influences…such was the mild spirit of antiquity that the nations were less attentive to the differences  than to the resemblances of their religious worship.” It is for this reason that Justice RC Lahoti, Justice DM Dharmadhikari and Justice P K Balasubramanyam in their observation said in 2005, “…objective of a democratic society ought to be to eliminate majority and minority”.

Vote-bank politics buried the philosophy and directives of the Constituent Assembly leading to the perpetuation of minority-centric definition of secularism. Even after seven decades of independence, India could not frame the Uniform Civil Code. Can there be a bigger travesty than this that the demand for UCC has become a symbol of communalism and sign of majoritarianism!

The Hindu narrative of multiculturalism, liberalism and Sarva Dharma Sambhav became victim of number game of Semitic religions. 

This is more than obvious when we find the Hindus reduced to a minority status in eight states. And in many other states the pattern of population growth shows that Hindus would be soon become minority. For instance, in Manipur, the Hindus’ share decreased from 45.76 per cent to 41.29 per cent between 1991 to 2011. During the same period Christian population increased from 34.04 per cent to 41.29 per cent. The situation in Arunachal Pradesh is no different. 

The Hindus’ share decreased from 37.04 per cent to 29.04 percent and the Christians share increased from 10.30 per cent in 1991 to 30.26 per cent in 2011. With the reversal of numbers, the narrative also got reversed. From Kashmir to North-East states where Hindus are in minority, they faced majoritarian behaviour. Hindus in these states are deprived from benefits granted to minorities. In Mizoram, the Hindus’ share decreased from 5.04 per cent in 1991 to 2.75 per cent in 2011 and during the same period Christian population has increased from 85.7 per cent to 87.16 per cent. 

Only two per cent Hindus are considered majority in Mizoram and 87 per cent Christians as minority and the latter get dual benefit of being majority in the state and also minority at national level. Privileges like scholarships to bank loans marked for minorities go to majority communities of these states. These states follow quasi-secularism and the challenge at the national level is to decolonise the narrative of secularism. In a more simple way, it can be said that secularsation of prevalent secularism is the biggest imperative.

The author is founding Honorary Director of India Policy Foundation, a Delhi-based think tank. Views expressed are personal.