1. Sanatana Dharmam is the Samaskaram ( Culture ) of Bharatham whereas Secularism is the concept for western culture. 2. However, who is communal and who is secular is something that needs to be questioned at this stage of the paper because some believe in the notion that India is secular, while some blame Modi for standing as a communal figure who is going to make, in turn, India communal. 3. On the one hand, the assertion of one’s caste identity, especially in relation to dalit and muslim minorities, becomes an extremely communal stand, and any organization or a political party which comprises of its own community members once again downgraded as fostering communal representation. 4. On the other hand, there are n-number of organizations ( All muslim and christian organisations and political parties - see the NOTE BELOW-) that exclusively cater to its own community and its own religion and which is blatantly exclusive to the minority community claim themselves to be secular and modern. 5. The double standard of Indian politics brings up such ambiguous positions to be taken, wherein, it is necessary that your own community concerns are made heard while at the same time, you do not want to be branded as communal.

Opinion
     01/08/2018
            1338.

Sub :-

1. Sanatana Dharmam is the Samaskaram ( Culture ) of Bharatham whereas Secularism is the concept for western culture.

2. However, who is communal and who is secular is something that needs to be questioned at this stage of the paper because some believe in the notion that India is secular, while some  blame Modi for standing as a communal figure who is going to make, in turn, India communal.

3. On the one hand, the assertion of one’s caste identity, especially in relation to dalit and muslim minorities, becomes an extremely communal stand, and any organization or a political party which comprises of its own community members once again downgraded as fostering communal representation.

4. On the other hand, there are n-number of organizations ( All muslim and christian organisations and political parties - see the NOTE BELOW-) that exclusively cater to its own community and its own religion and which is blatantly exclusive to the minority community claim themselves to be secular and modern.

5. The double standard of Indian politics brings up such ambiguous positions to be taken, wherein, it is necessary that your own community concerns are made heard while at the same time, you do not want to be branded as communal.

6. While those who are in the position of branding someone or somethingas communal themselves propagate communal ideologies under the masking term of secularism

Ref :-
Secularism: A Fraud propagated in India -
Media Report -  Suryakant Misra

I.
According to Merriam Webster: Secularism is “the belief that religion should not play a role in government, education, or other public parts of society”

While “National Secular Society’ of UK (1) notes the following core tenets of secularism:

Separation of religion from state
Secularism protects both believers and non-believers
Religious freedom
About democracy and fairness
Equal access to public services
Secularism is not atheism
Protects free speech and expression

II.
Before diving deeper into secularism, let us look at secularism’s history. Secularism as a concept has been around for a while but gained popularity when state wanted to be free from the powers of church in Europe.

Church has a brutal and bloody history till it converted all local, native customs, religions and faiths, pejoratively called pagan, into various denominations of Christianity. It used all available means to convert people including violent ones, especially violent ones. Church recruited the state to punish people when new converts returned to their origin faiths because the punishment required huge resources to control, torture, kill, and burn people with brute force. The kings were too eager to oblige because it gave them legitimacy and easier control over their subjects. It was a perfect interdependence. *

Once all subjects were converted, state had left no use for church while church wanted more power from the state. Idea of separation of churches from state originated from this situation and spread across all of Europe by the nineteenth century. Thus, the idea of secularism is deeply rooted in church sponsored violence and state’s desire to shake off church’s influence. Secularism should be seen from that perspective. *

III.
What secularism is not?

When India translated secularism, it said “dharma nirpeksha” or “sarv dharma sam-bhav” but we must also understand Dharma and why it is not “religion”. Dharma is a deeper subject and will be discussed in a separate article but for the sake of this one, let us call dharma to be “righteous duty” and we should have more “righteous duty” for and by the state and not be “nirpeksha” i.e. without one. *

Secularism is an alien concept in India just like Dharma is in the western societies. We do not see an individual or society without having their specific dharma, a duty and responsibility for them based on specific situations. As a concept, this does not exist in any western society and thus we have no English (or western) translation for the word Dharma. Life without dharma is not possible in India and thus the concept of nirpekshata to dharma is directly in contrast to our ethos and values. Thus, there is no translation of the word secularism in any of our languages.

IV.
So, secularism is not “dharm nirpekshata” or “all religions are same”. *

What could secularism have been in Indian context then? “Hindu society throughout its long history, had neither displayed any sort of religious fanaticism, nor ever used the state power for spreading any faith. To preach secularism to this society was like showing a lamp to the sun.”  Both Islam (in India and elsewhere) and Christianity (in Europe) used violence and fanaticism to further their faiths using the official state policy. After India’s independence, secularism could have been used to eliminate the fanaticism that had survived in both faiths in Indian context. But quite the opposite happened in India and continues to be perpetrated unabated. This intellectual perversion encouraged the physical and intellectual hostility towards Hindus and their ancient culture in their own land. The narrative was built that Muslims and Christians are in grave danger from majority Hindus while the opposite is true. *

V.
Some examples of this perversion are below:

1- Concept of minorities - when all citizens are equal in the eyes of the state, why some should be deemed minority? Why should there be any laws, rules and favors based on faith?

2- Most major Hindu temples are under state control while no mosques and churches are.

3- While converting religions (Christianity and Islam) claim equality among their followers, different denominations and castes exist in these religions in India just as they do in other native societies in India. They now demand reservations for dalit Christians and Muslims already get it. Politicians of all colors support this perversion when it suits them.

4- Some states are considering removing and changing laws of forceful/coercive conversions to be more politically attractive to them.

5- Non-Hindus are appointed as administrators of Hindu temples frequently and they in turn promote their own religious agenda in temples as prominent as Tirupati.

6- While subsidies are given to followers of Abrahamic religions (such as Haj yatra, until recently), Hindus are taxed on pilgrimages.

7- Right to Education (RTE) is skewed towards “minority” while there is full interference of government into educational institution of majorities. For example, AMU does not provide reservations to OBC/SC/ST while Hindu institutions do. This is the reason why politicians encourage “Lingayat” as separate religion and Ramakrishna Mission wants a minority status.

8- Manmohan Singh’s famous statement - “Muslims have the first right to the resources of this country”.

9- Hundreds and possibly thousands of government schemes are openly running across the country to support non-majority communities based on religion.

There are probably million such examples of established tradition of state policies based on religious status. This is not secularism. This is completely opposite of secularism.

VI.
What is the way forward?

Let 's clearly understand secularism. The two definitions in the beginning provide the basic construct of secularism. Breaking it down further secularism implies - everyone should get same treatment in the society. No-one should get any extra benefit or less benefit because of their religious leanings. State’s role is to ensure it happens.

If you are still with me, let us look at the above examples:

1- Should there be any one called religious minority?

2- Should there be any government interference in running the places of worship?

3- Should there be any reservations based on religious leanings?

VII.
You get the point. State should work for everyone the same. They should get out of the business of looking at society from the lense of religion.

This policy must be true for state and state institutions. But what about the institutions that are not government or state supported? What about educational institutions and what is taught there? What about religious places? What about businesses?

All institutions are created for a purpose by their founders. As long as they follow the law of the land, they should be allowed to cater to their constituents. Thus, temples should not be expected to host iftars and evangelists must not be expected at the doors of temples to convert the devotees.

VIII.
Coming to individuals, religion is a personal practice and must be followed accordingly. There should be no space for public takeover of street or land to follow one’s religious practice. That applies equally to namaz and chauki. Rules must be made and followed for public use of anything including non-religious activities and these rules must apply to everyone equally.

Recently, I have seen an expectation from friends and so-called public figures that being secular means individuals have to give equal treatment to all religions. And to be secular one should abandon one’s own religious priority, identity and practice. This is a naive and dangerous way of looking at secularism. States can be secular (I will argue some other time why they should not be) but individuals should not be expected to become one.

IX.
This is the biggest perversion of all. As an individual everyone is (and must be) allowed to practice one’s practices without the expectation that they must treat all other dharma/religions/faith on par with their own. That is what tenet three means from NSS above. All religions are not the same. It is perfectly fine to be a Hindu, a Muslim, a Jain or anything else without the expectation of being a secular too.

Let us consider some examples. When asked about our identity, we must be proud to say, “I am  Hindu”. When asked about other religions, we must be comfortable saying that other religions are not the same as Hinduism. We must feel free to spell out fact-based differences. We must not be violent, abusive or nasty but at the same time we should not tolerate secular rants without pushing back on the ongoing secular narrative.

X.
That is the biggest point of this article. If you are a Hindu, be a proud and confident Hindu. There must not be anything called a secular Hindu. There is no such thing.

Current secularism is the euphemism for appeasement and for activities that undermine the idea of India. Enough damage has been done in the last 70 years. Current secular narrative is slowly breaking but any single day it survives is one day too many. Let us hasten its demise.

In summary, here are the main points of this article

Secularism is an alien concept in Indian culture.

Dharma is an alien concept for western culture.

A perversion of secularism has taken place in India in such a way that opposite of secularism has been practiced in its name.

Course correction involves understanding and removing this perversion and equal treatment of all citizens in the public life.

Individuals should not be expected to be secular in their personal religious practices.

XI.
NOTE :-

Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (Andhra Pradesh),
All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) (Assam),
People's Democratic Conference of India (from West Bengal, has merged with AIUDF),
Welfare Party of India (West Bengal),
Social Democratic Party of India (West Bengal),
Manithaneya Makkal Katchi (MMK) (Tamil Nadu),
All India Ulema Council (Uttar Pradesh),
Peace Party (Uttar Pradesh),
Indian Union Muslim League (based in Kerala),
Indian National League (Kerala),
People's Democratic Party (Kerala),
Samastha Kerala Jam’eyyat ul-Ulama (Kerala),
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (Kerala),
Kerala Nadwathul Mujahideen (Kerala),
Popular Front (Kerala),

Current Factions - All christians Kerala Congress :-
Kerala Congress (M) led by KM Mani and also including P. J. Joseph, C. F. Thomas and Jose K. Mani
Kerala Congress (Jacob) led by Anoop Jacob and Johnny Nellore
Kerala Congress (B) led by R. Balakrishna Pillai and K. B. Ganesh Kumar
Janadhipathya Kerala Congress led by K. Francis George
Kerala Congress (Skaria Thomas) led by Skaria Thomas
Kerala Congress (Thomas) led by P.C. Thomas
Kerala Congress (Nationalist) led by Kuruvilla Matthew
Kerala Congress (Secular) led by Kallada Das
Kerala Vikas Congress (Jose Chemberi) led by Jose Chemberi
Kerala Vikas Congress (Prakash Kuriakose) led by Prakash Kuriakose

XII.

OPINION :-

1. BHARATHAM FROM ANCIENT TIMES EXISTS IN SANATANA DHARMAM;

2. BHARATHAM IS INCLUSIVE OF ALL RELIGIONS WITH FULL AND EQUAL FREEDOM;

3. BHARATHAM RESPECTS ALL AND REGARDS WORLD AS ONE FAMILY;

4. BHARATHAM AND HER SANATANA DHARMAM BELIVE IN ONENESS;

5. SANATANA DHARMAM IS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS HINDUISM IN MODERN TERMS;

6. MANY FOOLS IN BHARATEEYA POLITICS ABUSE HINDUISM MEANS THESE IDIOTS DO NOT RECOGNISE THEIR MOTHER;

7. TO ABUSE BJP OR PM MODI, THESE POLITICAL DEMONS USE HINDU, HINDUISM TOOL;

8. RECENTLY SHASHI THAROOR IS BECOMING OVER-SMARTY, AND SHOWS HIS IGNORANCE BY HIS FOOLISH STATEMENTS ON HINDU, HINDUISM;

9. JUST AS MUSLIMS, CHRISTIANS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS GROUPS ARE ORGANISED ON RELIGION BASE, BUT HINDUS, HINDUISM IS NOT;

10. THIS DOES NOT MEAN SANATANA DHARMAM IS WEAK OR FAILED, BUT HINDUS FORGOT TO RECOGNISE ONLY.

HINDUS AWAKE! AWAKE!! AWAKE!!! UTHISHTATHA JAGRATHA .....

JAIHIND
VANDEMATHARAM