What unites India: Balancing the sacred and secular

India Today

8 hours ago

(NOTE: This article was originally published in the India Today issue dated August 20, 2007)Ever since India became independent there have been Jeremiahs prophesying that it will fall apart. With each crisis India has faced during the 60 turbulent years of its Independence, their dismal voices have risen only for them to be proved false prophets.The appalling violence of Partition appeared to threaten the unity of India from the start. But then those who feared that the desire to take revenge on Muslims for Partition would lead to an unsustainable militant Hindu state found that the shock of Gandhi's assassination brought India back to its senses. There was the trouble over language, wisely as it turned out, resolved by the creation of linguistic states. Many thought that was a recipe for disintegration, but they have been proved wrong.advertisementIn Nehru's later days, the nervous question asked over and over again, was 'After Nehru who?' During the Chinese war, Nehru himself, who had done so much to establish a stable India, feared that Assam would be lost when the Chinese invaded. Assam and the rest of the North-East is still with India and Lal Bahadur Shastri followed by Indira Gandhi gave a resounding reply to the doubters who had asked 'After Nehru who?'
During Indira Gandhi's Emergency, many prophesied the end of Indian democracy, and I, for one, believe that it would have broken India because it can only be held together if it's ruled with a fairly light rein, which only democracy can do. But then Indira confounded the prophets of doom by calling for an election and accepting defeat. This has been the hallmark of Indian democracy—the acceptance of the voters' decision, and the peaceful transfer of power. So many countries have been destabilised by governing parties refusing to accept defeat at the polls.advertisementWhen India entered the era of coalition governments, there were plenty of people who said it could only be held together by strong one party governments. The economic reforms, which at last broke the stranglehold of the 'licence permit raj', and freed the creative energies of so many Indian entrepreneurs, were introduced by a government which on paper looked very weak. The destruction of the mosque in Ayodhya was seen by many in India and abroad as the end of Indian secularism and the beginning of religious strife which would turn the country into a Lebanon or a Northern Ireland. But that was nearly 15 years ago now and India is still a secular country. Gujarat in 2002 can now be seen as another aberration, a serious one too but not one that has threatened the unity of India.All this is not to say that Gujarat or Ayodhya should be dismissed lightly. I have always felt that India is like a great ocean liner which sometimes gets tossed about by mighty storms and tempestuous seas, and seems on the verge of capsizing, but somehow always rights herself and goes on her way. Perhaps as a result of this, there seems to be a widespread belief that India can ride out of any storm, and so no one bothers to take protections even when the black clouds are building up.advertisementIndia remains committed to the 'chalne do' philosophy. For me one of the most striking examples of this attitude is the failure of successive governments to take stern action against those who threaten secularism by propagating hatred of religions other than their own.What is it that holds India together? It could be the very fact that has led many of those Jeremiahs to prophesy that it will disintegrate—its size and in particular its diversity. I remember once suggesting to Indira Gandhi that it must be very difficult to govern a country as large and as diverse as India and she replied, 'I think it would be much harder to govern a smaller country.'She then went on to explain how India's diversity was its strength. 'When there is trouble in Bengal', she explained, 'the rest of the country just gets on with life as usual, and even when there is trouble in the capital Delhi, it doesn't have a pan-Indian impact.' Of course, there have been times, such as the riots after Ayodhya, when the trouble spread well beyond one state, but even then the riots did not engulf the whole of India.advertisementIndira Gandhi's remarks reminded me of a broadcast by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto at the start of the movement against him in 1977. Speaking with even more than his usual emotion, he said he knew that his opponents would get someone killed in police firing in Lahore and take the body through the bazaar, do the same in Karachi, and so set the whole country on fire. Banging the arms of his chair he said 'But this chair is strong, this chair is strong, and I will not allow it to happen.' The prime minister's chair was not strong enough and Bhutto was dethroned. That is the problem of a smaller country.Armies, institutions which are meant to defend their countries from external enemies, often become the enemies of their own people. On the pretext of restoring stability they destabalise their countries. India has been singularly fortunate in having an apolitical army which has never threatened the civilian government. The army must be given full credit for maintaining high standards of discipline which ensure that it obeys whatever orders it is given by the government. We must also give credit to politicians for not trying to persuade the army to intervene on their behalf.advertisementBut there is another factor too which militates against the army attempting to take power, and it is once again India's diversity. The army is a reflection of that diversity with officers and soldiers coming from all parts of the country. In such a diverse army it would be difficult for any one officer, no matter how senior, or any group of officers, to persuade the whole army to break its disciplined tradition and overthrow the civilian government.But for me perhaps the most important factor in holding India together is what Ashish Nandy has called its salad bowl culture. India has a unique ability to allow different cultures and different religions to live side-by-side, retaining their own identity. Recently I was in Varanasi where the well-known Mahant of the Sankat Mochan temple, Veer Bhadra Mishra, told me about his childhood when Hindus and Muslims in his village would attend each others' weddings and festivals, but the hosts would provide separate food for their guests.That would be anathema to many in these days when the common belief seems to be that we should have a soup culture in which everyone is mixed up and all lose their individual identity. This is considered to be egalitarian, but then egalitarians sometimes forget that we never have been—nor is there any sign we ever will be—equal, or indeed the same.advertisementVeer Bhadra Mishra is a bit of a Jeremiah himself. He said to me, 'Hindus and Muslims were living very happily together but that has come under threat because of politicians.' One of the greatest strengths of India is that the Hindu majority does still live together, peacefully for the most part, with the world's second largest Muslim population. There are those who would disturb the peace, some Muslim clergy and some Hindu preachers, as well as some politicians, but how successful are they? I was still the BBC correspondent at the time of Ayodhya and when the riots broke out; I was asked time and time again whether this was the end of India's secularism. I always used to reply, 'In my experience, in India things go up very rapidly but they come down again rapidly too.'For all the hatred spewed out by both sides at that time, millions of Muslims today still educate their children in their religion, go to mosques daily to say their prayers, and of course wear whatever clothes they believe their faith demands. When I am in Britain, I often tell people that it would be unthinkable for the vast majority of Indians to question a Muslim woman's right to wear a burqa, or a Sikh's right to wear a turban.All this does not mean that India should not take the threat of religious fundamentalism seriously, but to do that it also has to acknowledge the dangers of a certain type of secularism. The renowned religious writer Karen Armstrong, who was once a Roman Catholic nun, has written, 'fundamentalism exists in a symbiotic relationship with an aggressive liberalism or secularism, and, under attack, increasingly becomes more bitter, extreme, and excessive.'I do find that in India there are secularists who are so aggressive that they do not allow any room for religion in public, or indeed private life. This is not the same as the pseudo secularism that BJP leaders talk about. They are talking about their claim that undue preference is given to minorities. The secularism I am talking about fails to acknowledge the importance of religion in many, many people's lives, and the impossibility of drawing an absolute, hard and fast line, between the role of faith in private and public life. Mahatma Gandhi did not do that.I am sometimes made aware of this aggressive secularism when I am accused of supporting Hindutva just because I write about Hinduism. I firmly believe in Indian secularism but not in the sort of secularism which has no time and no respect for people's religion. I recently read of a report by Doudou Diene, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance. In it, he criticised the spread of Christianophobia in Europe and urged the return to a correct balance of 'defending the secular and protecting religious freedom'.I detect in certain secular quarters in India a Hinduphobia, and if there is one threat I do see to the unity of India, it is not maintaining the balance Diene talks about. This surely means that the two national parties should realise they are in danger of forging the symbiotic relationship Armstrong described by continuing their shouting match between Hindutva and secularism.—The writer was the BBC's bureau chief in New Delhi for 22 years and has written several popular books on IndiaSubscribe to India Today Magazine- EndsMust Watch