Gita, Ramayana in school curriculum sparks constitutional debate in Uttarakhand
However, this move, implemented from Wednesday, has allegedly met with immediate and widespread opposition from the state's teaching community.
The protesting teacher associations assert that these are religious texts, and as per the Constitution, religious education cannot be imparted in educational institutions.
Sanjay Kumar Tamta, President of the Teacher Association, articulated their stance to this newspaper, stating, 'Article 28(1) of the Indian Constitution explicitly states that religious instruction shall not be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State funds or receiving aid from State funds. This provision is designed to uphold the nation's secular fabric and ensure equal respect for all religions.'
He further argued, 'The directive to incorporate Gita shlokas into prayer assemblies violates the constitutional framework, thereby undermining the principle of secular education in government schools. These schools serve students from diverse religious, caste, and community backgrounds. Mandating the recitation of verses from a single religious text can foster feelings of discomfort and discrimination among adherents of other faiths and communities, which runs contrary to the objectives of social harmony and inclusive education.' Mr Tamta articulately presented these points.
Countering this perspective, Dr Mukul Kumar Sati, the Director of Education, informed this newspaper about the instructions given to all Chief Education Officers: 'Students are to recite at least one shloka with its meaning daily during prayer assemblies. Additionally, one value-based shloka is to be declared the 'Shloka of the Week' and displayed on the notice board with its meaning. Students will practise it, and a discussion will be held, and feedback collected on the last day of the week.'
Dr Sati further elaborated on the intent, stating that teachers should periodically explain the shlokas and inform students how the principles of the Srimad Bhagavad Gita foster values, improve behaviour, develop leadership skills, enhance decision-making abilities, promote emotional balance, and cultivate scientific thinking.
'Students should also be apprised that the teachings in the Srimad Bhagavad Gita are rooted in Sankhya philosophy, psychology, logic, behavioural science, and moral philosophy, making them universally beneficial for humanity from a secular viewpoint,' asserted Director Dr Sati.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
28 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Appeals court keeps order blocking Trump administration from indiscriminate immigration sweeps
AP A federal appeals court ruled Friday night to uphold a lower court's temporary order blocking the Trump administration from conducting indiscriminate immigration stops and arrests in Southern California. A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held a hearing Monday afternoon at which the federal government asked the court to overturn a temporary restraining order issued July 12 by Judge Maame E. Frimpong, arguing it hindered their enforcement of immigration law. Immigrant advocacy groups filed suit last month, accusing President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration. The lawsuit included three detained immigrants and two U.S. citizens as plaintiffs. In her order, Frimpong said there was a "mountain of evidence" that federal immigration enforcement tactics were violating the Constitution. She wrote that the government cannot use factors such as apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a location such as a tow yard or car wash, or someone's occupation as the only basis for reasonable suspicion to detain someone. The appeals court panel agreed and questioned the government's need to oppose an order preventing them from violating the constitution. "If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion," the judges wrote. The Department of Homeland Security said being in the country illegally is what makes someone a target of immigration officers, not their skin colour, race or ethnicity. "Unelected judges are undermining the will of the American people," department spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said Saturday in an emailed statement. "President Trump and Secretary Noem are putting the American people first by removing illegal aliens who pose a threat to our communities." A hearing for a preliminary injunction, which would be a more substantial court order as the lawsuit proceeds, is scheduled for September. Los Angeles a battleground over immigration policy The Los Angeles region has been a battleground with the Trump administration over its aggressive immigration strategy that spurred protests and the deployment of the National Guards and Marines for several weeks. Federal agents have rounded up immigrants without legal status to be in the US from Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms, many of whom have lived in the country for decades. Among the plaintiffs is Los Angeles resident Brian Gavidia, who was shown in a video taken by a friend on June 13 being seized by federal agents as he yells, "I was born here in the states, East LA bro!" They want to "send us back to a world where a U.S. citizen ... can be grabbed, slammed against a fence and have his phone and ID taken from him just because he was working at a tow yard in a Latino neighborhood," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mohammad Tajsar told the court Monday. The federal government argued that it hadn't been given enough time to collect and present evidence in the lawsuit, given that it was filed shortly before the July 4 holiday and a hearing was held the following week. "It's a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution," attorney Jacob Roth said. He also argued that the lower court's order was too broad, and that immigrant advocates did not present enough evidence to prove that the government had an official policy of stopping people without reasonable suspicion. He referred to the four factors of race, language, presence at a location, and occupation that were listed in the temporary restraining order, saying the court should not be able to ban the government from using them at all. He also argued that the order was unclear on what exactly is permissible under the law. "Legally, I think it's appropriate to use the factors for reasonable suspicion," Roth said The judges sharply questioned the government over their arguments. "No one has suggested that you cannot consider these factors at all," Judge Jennifer Sung said. However, those factors alone only form a "broad profile" and don't satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard to stop someone, she said. Sung, a Biden appointee, said that in an area like Los Angeles, where Latinos make up as much as half the population, those factors "cannot possibly weed out those who have undocumented status and those who have documented legal status." She also asked: "What is the harm to being told not to do something that you claim you're already not doing?" Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the Friday night decision a "victory for the rule of law" and said the city will protect residents from the "racial profiling and other illegal tactics" used by federal agents. (Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Zomato delivered, but did the other listed unicorns? US tariff hike to hit Indian exports, may push RBI towards rate cuts Will TCS layoffs open the floodgates of mass firing at Indian IT firms? Indian IT firms never reveal the truth hiding behind 'strong' deal wins Is Bajaj Finance facing its HDFC Bank moment? Tata Motors' INR38k crore Iveco buy: Factors that can make investors nervous Stock Radar: Strides Pharma stock hits fresh 52-week high in July; will the rally continue in August? F&O Radar| Deploy Short Strangle in Nifty to gain from Theta decay For investors who can think beyond Trump: 5 large-cap stocks with an upside potential of up to 36%
Hindustan Times
43 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
NCP-SP leader says Sanatan Dharma, Hinduism not same; BJP leaders react
Jitendra Awhad, MLA from the Nationalist Congress Party–SP (NCP-SP), has courted controversy after making remarks criticising 'so-called Sanatan Dharma', arguing that Hinduism is different from it. NCP-SP MLA Jitendra Awhad said concept of Sanatan Dharma behind oppression of anti-caste activists, social reformers such as BR Ambedkar.(PTI File) ANI reported that Awhad was talking to reporters when he said, 'There was never any religion called Sanatan Dharma. We are followers of Hindu Dharma.' He said the concept of Sanatan Dharma was behind the oppression of anti-caste activists, social reformers, and other leaders: 'It did not even allow Dr BR Ambedkar to drink water or attend school.' He also said, 'It was this so-called Sanatan Dharma that denied our Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj his coronation. This Sanatan Dharma defamed our Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. The followers of this Sanatan Dharma tried to assassinate Jyotirao Phule.' It was Ambedkar who "rose against Sanatan Dharma, burned the Manusmriti, and rejected its oppressive traditions', he added. Leaders of the ruling BJP reacted angrily. Party leader Ram Kadam said, 'The statement by the leader of Sharad Pawar's faction is based on an incomplete study of the scriptures… Will they now do this for politics… defame Sanatan Dharma?' He accused Awhad of making the statements for "politics of appeasement'.
The Hindu
43 minutes ago
- The Hindu
‘Sanatan Dharma has ruined India', says NCP-SCP MLA Jitendra Awhad after Malegaon verdict
NCP-SCP MLA Jitendra Awhad has sparked a fresh row by saying that Sanatan Dharma has "ruined India" and calling its ideology "perverted". His comments came after all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blasts were acquitted by a special NIA court, reigniting the political debate over the term "saffron terror." Addressing reporters, Mr. Awhad said, "Sanatan Dharma has ruined India. There was never any religion called Sanatan Dharma. We are followers of Hindu Dharma. It was this so-called Sanatan Dharma that denied our Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj his coronation. This Sanatan Dharma defamed our Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. The followers of this Sanatan Dharma tried to assassinate Jyotirao Phule." He added, "They threw cow dung and filth at Savitribai Phule. This very Sanatan Dharma conspired to kill Shahu Maharaj. It did not even allow Dr B.R. Ambedkar to drink water or attend school. It was Babasaheb Ambedkar who finally rose against Sanatan Dharma, burned the Manusmriti, and rejected its oppressive traditions. The creator of Manusmriti himself emerged from this Sanatani tradition. One must not be afraid to say openly that Sanatan Dharma and its Sanatani ideology are perverted." Meanwhile, BJP MP Sambit Patra, in a press conference on Friday (August 1, 2025), targeted the Congress over the use of terms like "saffron terror" and "Sanatan terrorist." "Senior Congress leader Prithiviraj Chauhan has said two things — terrorism has no religion, which symbolises appeasement... In the same breath, he goes on to say the term Hindu terrorist or Sanatan terrorist... Sushil Kumar Shinde used the term 'saffron terror' in one of their conclave. A few years ago, when he was asked if he still felt it was right to use the word 'saffron terror', he smiled and said he was asked to use the term by the party leadership... We all know who he was talking about. He was pressurised by the Gandhi family into using the term 'saffron terror'," he said. On Thursday (July 31), Mumbai's Special NIA Court acquitted all seven accused of being involved in the 2008 Malegaon blasts, with the court saying that the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The NIA court has also ordered the Maharashtra government to award ₹2 lakh compensation to the families of the victims and ₹50,000 compensation to the injured.
