Secularism in simplest terms means separation of religion from civil affairs of the state. It also implies the removal or minimizing of the role of religion in the public sphere. The objective behind adhering to secularism as a state policy is to ensure freedom of religion to the citizens and to prevent state-sponsored religious discrimination. The Indian constitution adopted secularism through articles 25 to 28 and our preamble declares India to be a secular nation among other things. However the fundamental issue with secularism in a country as diverse and old as India is the concept of secularism is viewed as rigidly dichotomous caught between two views of those who support and oppose it.

Why Indian Secularism Need Not Be Western

The view of those who staunchly defend secularism is that for secularism to be modern it has to be western. But the western concept of secularism which was born in a single religious society itself is changing and this model of secularism is not apt in a multi-religious society like India because:

1. The concept of secularism in the west can be termed as negative secularism where there is a complete separation of the church and the state.
2. Western secularism mainly in Europe while giving freedom of religion, also conferred freedom vis-a-vis religion and freedom of thought, which gave freedom to criticise any idea, belief, or opinion.
3. In a highly religious country like India where religion is part and parcel of every activity these two rights are contradictory with each other and will create tensions in society.
4. The strict separation of state from religion means that the state cannot interfere to reform even discriminatory religious practices nor there is any scope for state-sponsored religious reforms.
5. This complete non-interference of state even for sake of religious reforms is another issue in India because of religion sanctioned social evils like caste system, untouchability or triple talaq, etc.
6. The western model of secularism views religion as strictly a private matter. This view of religion as a private and individual matter eliminates the scope of community-based and minority rights, which will alienate minorities in India.
7. The absolute separation of church and state and absolute neutrality of the state in religious affairs means that the state views an individual as a citizen but not as a member of a religious community.
8. This view of the individual as a citizen far removed from their religious identity can be insensitive to their religious beliefs resulting in laws like banning turbans, Jewish skull caps or Muslim headscarves in government schools and offices. Moreover, these laws are infringing individual rights to religious expression.
9. With huge minority populations, especially the Muslim population (Islam is the second largest religion in India ) and strict separation of religion from state ignoring minority rights and fears will create a fertile ground for racialization, like happening in France.

Why Cannot We Replace Secularism With Tolerance

The view of those who oppose secularism is that secularism is a western concept, and for a concept that is determining the state policy, it has to be Indian or rooted wholly in home-grown traditions. Thus this view seeks to replace secularism with ideas of toleration available within indigenous religious traditions. However, this view is also not acceptable because:

1. Secularism as per the Indian traditional context means “Sarva Dharma Sambhava”, which has three essential elements, religious coexistence, inter-religious tolerance, and equal respect to all religions.
2. Though these three elements are crucial elements of secularism, secularism as a concept is much more than that. Secularism is grounded in notions of equality -both intra and interreligious which goes far beyond the notion of inter-religious tolerance.
3. One may be tolerant of other religions and yet might treat people of other religions inferior or refuse to respect the religion of others.
4. The recent PEW survey on religious attitudes across the nations substantiated this fact, where the majority of the respondents said they respect all religions, but also prefer religious segregation.
5. Most of the Indians, oppose aspects like willingness to accept people of other religions as neighbours and inter-religious marriages, etc. This survey is a good example of why we cannot replace secularism with indigenous religious tolerance.
6. Another reason why we cannot replace secularism with tolerance is the idea that tolerance means not interfering in the affairs of other religions even when we have the power to stop social evils prevalent in those religions.
7. Thus unlike secularism which tries to usher in necessary religious reforms to create a truly equal, liberal, and just society, tolerance allows the perpetuation of those religiously sanctioned social evils to continue.

Distinctiveness Of Indian Secularism

1.While it is inappropriate to identify secularism in India with western concepts, we on the other hand cannot also replace it with the Indian idea of Sarva dharma sambhava. Indian secularism has a relation with both ideas but it is also much more. 2. 2.Indian secularism does not view an Individual as a separate entity removed from their religion. Laws in India are made keeping in mind religious sensibilities. For example, Article 25 provides freedom to profess religion under which Sikhs can wear turbans, carry kirpans and Muslims can wear hijab.

1. The Indian model of secularism apart from granting an individual his or her right to practice any religion also provides community-based rights and rights to minorities. Article 26 protects collective freedom of religion.
2. The Indian model of secularism not only aims to achieve inter-religious equality but also intra-religious equality. For example, under the French model, the state can do little if a religion excommunicates its members. However, India’s model with the aim to achieve intrareligious equality can interfere in such matters.
3. Historically Dalits have faced many discriminations under the garb of religion. But the Indian state interfered in this issue, abolished untouchability, and threw open Hindu temples to all Hindus.
4. Unlike the western model of strict negative secularism, the Indian model can be both negative and positive. The Indian state may engage with religion negatively to oppose religious tyranny. This is reflected in such actions as the ban on untouchability.
5. It may also choose a positive mode of engagement. For example, the Indian Constitution grants all religious minorities the right to establish and maintain their own educational institutions.

Though Secularism as a concept is western, India even before being declared as a secular state, has a rich legacy of religious tolerance and coexistence, essential elements of secularism. The constitution of India while incorporating and declaring India as a secular state has taken into consideration both our past legacy of religious tolerance and the western concept of secularism and created something more distinctive and unique that can reflect our social reality. Today while most of the western societies are grappling with the increasing multi-religious nature of their society, Indian secularism can serve as their guide and as the future of secularism in a globalized world.