Religion and Politics - Essay, UPSC MAINS | Course for UPPSC Preparation - UPPSC (UP) PDF Download

Religion and Politics

structure

(1) Opening    —    Misuse of religion by the politicians.

(2) Body    —    Quote W.C. Banerjee.

    —    Situation today is far more frightening than it was in August ‘1947.

    —    Historical perspective.

    —    Have to fight religious bigotry and fanaticism.

    —    Example of Wars of religion.

    —    Secularisation of Culture in France.

(3) Closing    —    The tradition of religious toleration is the dominant tendency of Indian civilization.

  —    The state, constitutional provisions, legislations and political movements should preserve this tradition.

Since independence, our nation has been witnessing numerous communal riots including the one as the aftermath of Ayodhya vandalism,Bombayblasts,Godhra,Gujrat riots,Muzzafarnagar,Malda and Kashganj . The ideology of Gandhi was something different, i.e. Ram Rajya. But today’s politicians have  misused the religion blatantly for their political gain. They want to have vote bank out of religion shattering the sanctity of sacred hearts.

The first President of Indian National Congress, W.C. Banerjee, a Christian, laid down in his address (December 1885) the Congress objective as “the eradication, by direct friendly, personal intercourse of all possible race and creed of provincial prejudices amongst all lovers of our country, and the fuller development and consolidation of the sentiments of national unity”. National unity remained the goal of India’s struggle for freedom.

Inspite of the ceaseless striving of several generations of our countrymen the goal has remained illusive. Twice has this sub-continent been subjected to partition first the division of India and then the break-up of Pakistan. Although we gave ourselves a constitutional framework for promoting national unity and all-round development, we have witnessed, in the last four decades, separatist movements inspired by communal, sectarian and ethnic considerations. On top of this came the organised vandalism in Ayodhya which was the result of the mounting communal frenzy.As per data shared by Home Affairs,atleast 111 people were killed and 2384 others injured in 822 communal incidents in the country in 2017.

The aftermath of the demolition of the Babri Mosque produced fearful communal riots in Surat, Ahmedabad, Bhopal and Bombay and a series of terrible retaliatory bomb blasts designed to shatter public confidence and spread chaos.Godhra incident and the riot that followed in Gujarat was shameful. The riots and the blasts revealed the close nexus between the expanding world of crime and the forces of communal disharmony. The fabric of the ordered state is virtually in taters.

The situation today is far more frightening than it was in August 1947. For then the country possessed a strong readership which had a powerful hold on the popular imagination. There was the mighty Congress organisation to back it. That is why the Leadership and the party were able to steer the ship of state in the stormy waters of the partition days. Now there is no such hope.

The real problem is the difficulty of reconciling the ideal of secular state with the intractable reality. Another complication is the unique historical evolution of the national movement in India. Those leaders of freedom struggle who tried to transform the Indian National Congress into a dynamic mass organisation, were inspired by the religious ideal, not in the sense of a narrow creed on a system of rituals, but religion as a moral imperative.

Everybody knew that Bal Gangadhar Tilak, the most popular Indian leader before the rise of Mahatma Gandhi, was inspired by the Vedic religion and the teachings of Upanishads and Geeta. Tilak said that a nation consists of many elements: ethnology, language, literature and so on. “Patriotism in India involved welding of races. The limits should be widened and the ideal of composite patriotism attained.” And yet Tilak did not hesitate to use instruments like the observation of Ganesh Utsava and Shivaji Jayanti celebrations in order to arise popular interest in the cause of Swaraj.

Tilak undoubtedly drew inspiration from the regional history of Western India as also the ancient ideals of India. He used the Maratha history and Hindu traditions as stepping stones to the ideal of composite Indian nation. The Congress Democratic Party’s Manifesto (1920), which he finalised before his death, is a wholly secular document. There is not the ‘slightest trace of religious bigotry in it. It advocates the removal of all civic, secular or social disabilities based on caste or custom. It expresses belief in religious toleration and improvements of relations among followers of different religions.

Aurobindo Ghosh, who did so much to awaken political consciousness in Bengal, was wholly inspired by the religious ideal—as distinguished from religious bigotry and fanaticism. Vivekanand, whose influence was quite widespread and whose career can not be conceived without its religious basis, thought that even the concept of religious toleration was inadequate and advanced the doctrine of acceptance of all religions.

G K Gokhale, the liberal on whom even Jinnah looked upon as leader, often lamented the fact that he did not possess the faith of M G Ranade, was profoundly influenced by the normal aspect of religion. “Remunication as the highest form of religion” appealed to his disciple, Mahatma Gandhi.

Gandhi’s philosophy of religion and politics did not involve the Mahmud Gazni-Auganzeb policy of destroying temples and breaking idols nor the Sangh Pariwar’s programme of destroying three or three thousand or thirty thousand Muslim shrines erected on former Hindu places of worship and build Hindu temples thereon. His concept of religion and Ram Rajya was a moral concept: “I cannot conceive politics as divorced from religion. Indeed, religion should pervade all of our actions. Here religion does not mean sectarianism. It means a belief in ordered moral government of the universe. It is not less real because of its being unseen. This religion transcends Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, etc. It does not supersede them. It harmonises them and gives them reality.”

Another personality who powerfully influenced our national movement was Jawaharlal Nehru. He was quite unlike Tilak and Gandhi. His inspiration did not derive from religion. He was an ardent champion of science and modernity “interested in this world, in this life, not in some other world or a future life.” And yet he wrote that the environment in which he grew took atma, future life Karma theory, and reincarnation for granted and that he had been affected by it and was in a sense favourably disposed towards these assumptions.” He confessed that “ethical approach to life” had a “strong appeal” for him and notwithstanding the powerful effect of Marxist Teachings on him “a vague idealist approach something rather akin to the vedanta approach”, crept into his mind.

When one talks of separating religion from politics, the proposal comes of against the whole historical development of the freedom struggle. We should avoid this terminology. It will not be accepted the legislation for the basis of the American concept of separation of Church and State. The context in Western Europe and America was different. Here there is no established church. The problem here is misuse of religions in political life. What needs to be fought is religious bigotry and fanaticism harnessed for the purpose of expanding one’s political base and garnering votes. It is this menace that needs to be curbed.

For several centuries Europe was riven by religious controversies and conflicts. Inquisition was instituted. Dissenters were burnt alive at the stake by the established churches and the state. Freedom of conscience was under total eclipse. Ultimately armed conflict broke out which is known in history as the Wars of Religion. The German lands were devastated The 

treaty of Westphalia at last ended these wars. “The right to change religion was permitted, but in the event of such a change the minorities of the other faith were to be tolerated.” A prince who changed his religion was to permit Protestantism and Catholicism to exist side by side.

In France there was progressive secularisation of culture. But Louis XIV imbued with the spirit of “one God, one king, one faith” persecuted the Huguenots and forced them to become Catholics or leave the country. Centuries earlier, in Spain the Jews and the Muslims had been given the same choice. Religious uniformity was enforced. In brief the age of Protestant Reformation was an age of persecution. Both Protestants and Catholics believed that they were in possession of the sole objective truth. Luther, himself a rebel, also permitted religious persecution. Both Protestants and Catholics believed that “Persecution of heretics was pleasing to God”, Calvin went one step further; he made heresy “Punishable by Death”. In England some dissenters, called Puritans, migrated to America in search of religious freedom.

Soon after the Mahatma’s assassination, a motion on communalism was adopted by the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) on the initiative of Ananthasayanam Ayyangar on April 3, 1948. The text of the resolution is as under:

Whereas it is essential for the proper functioning of democracy and the growth of national unity and solidarity that communalism should be eliminated from Indian life, this Assembly is of opinion that no communal organisation, which, by its constitution or by the exercise of discretionary power vested in any of its officers and organs, admits to, or excludes from, its membership persons on ground of religion, race and caste or any of them, should be permitted to engage in any activities other than those essential for the bonafide religious, cultural, social and educational needs to the communities and that all steps, legislative and administrative, necessary to prevent such activities should be taken.

This decision remained unimplemented. The oldest organisation, Congresss has been wooing to the various communal parties on several occasions but so far nothing such ideology is seen within the Congress to outlaw the religion from politics.

In India despite the occasional persecution of Jains, Buddhists and Vaishnavites, the tradition of religious toleration was the dominant tendency of Indian civilisation. Even the intolerance of idol-breaking Muslim rulers was mitigated by practical considerations and rulers like Akbar and Prince Dara, and saints like Kabir and Nanak preached universal harmony. What we need in India today is not the Western doctrine of separation and divorce but of toleration and equal respect or what Vivekananda called acceptance. The state, constitutional provisions, legislation and political movements here should preserve this tradition, and supress religious bigotry and communal fanaticism with a strong hand.