Let’s dwell on the similarities and differences between ‘Western secularism’ and ‘Indian secularism’ to understand why it is time to replace the former with the latter  

The western concept of secularism is believed to be from the 19th century. As per French scholar Jean Bauberot, a secular society consists of three essential components. (i)

Separation of religious institutions from the institutions of the stateFreedom of conscience for all individuals, circumscribed only by the need for public order and the respect of the rights of other individualsNo discrimination by the state against individuals based on their beliefs.

The reason why the western civilisation had to set up this pillar of secularism in Europe and America was buried in the crusades between the Christians and Muslims. When the civilisations west to the Indian subcontinent were involved in a war of religions to establish on others that only their God is true and the other is false, ‘who believes which God’ became the core identity of a human being. Now, post-crusades, when both the parties continued, Christians in Europe and Muslims in the Arabic world, Europe went into another turmoil. It was the rise of modern science by fighting against the fundamental principles of the Roman Catholic Church. This threw European society into a division between science and (Christian) religion. Now the believers of religion and science fought among themselves. And when that society evolved into a democratic system and came into coexistence with Muslims, the need for an idea arose which could prevent citizens from crusading for their god again. Also, it was necessary to restrict the fight between science and religion because the fundamental principles about our existence were similar in Islam and Christianity. The rise of modern science was against them both. Here the western civilisation coined the thought ‘secularism’, filled with the three fundamental components we mentioned in the beginning. During this setting up, India was under British rule and thrown into the English education system. All the thoughts and ideas of the west were ingested in Indians through education and academia. Secularism and marxism were among them in the 19th century. And that was the funny part of this entire play. The ancient Hindu (Hindu is a geographic word meaning ‘Indic’) civilisation followed a way of life named ‘Sanatan Dharma’ or ‘The Universal consciousness towards truth’, which already consisted of the three components of secularism but with more depth and vastness. 

The Indic Secularism

In the Sanatan Dharma way of life, humans were told that seeking the truth of their existence is the prime responsibility of human life. The seeking mainly was inward in mind and partly outward in nature. Following that seeking, many ancient Indians had self-realised that because human is the most advanced outcome of this existence, all the steps of the universe that led to the projection of humans have their footprints in the human brain. If a human can unlock his brain to its fullest, he would know the entire history of the universe or multiverse (what they believed) on his own. He would know the fundamental science by which he is projected in the series of creations, and also, he would know the science which governs this existence. That is how the ancient Indians discovered specific techniques to use the human body, brain and consciousness to unlock the truth of existence. Those techniques are called Yogic techniques, and by following those techniques, what they knew was written in Vedas, Upanishads and all other Indian spiritual books. In a way, what modern scientists started in Europe by fighting against religion was the beginning of the ancient Indian civilisation. And so, what Galelio and Newton knew in Sevententh century was written in ancient Indian scriptures. The main plot of Christopher Nolan’s 2014 film Interstellar was also a plot of several stories in Srimad Bhagavatam, written thousands of years ago.  

So, there were no commands in Indian way of life. Just a push to know the truth and various techniques for that. There was no religion. There was just Dharma as the duty towards the supreme consciousness. The word ‘faith’ was not coined to believe in a certain God. It was coined to believe in the process of knowing. It was a guidance to be patient and focused in the techniques by not distracting in scepticism. And the essence of their knowledge was, ‘There is one common existence for us all, and so, there is one common truth, too. Whatever way you seek, you will ultimately reach one common truth. That’s why every human is free to choose whatever way according to their tendency. But no one is free to enforce one particular way on others. You can guide others with your experience of your path, but you can’t enforce your way on them.’ That was Indic secularism. Everyone’s consciousness is free to seek the truth but not to go behind the lust of converting others to their path. Because all paths will lead to that truth, either by ease and comfort or by pain and suffering, depending on their choice. It was a call to the humans that seeking truth or god is the purpose of religion, not to increase the religious population by converting others and dominating the land. That is a tool for political power, not religion. Thus, religious conversions violate the first component of western secularism mentioned at the beginning of the article. You are allowing conversions; you are allowing a set of religious people to take on political power democratically. That is the fault line. 

The Damage Western Secularism did to India

But because India was under British rule and English education, western secularism was posed over Indic Secularism when she gained independence. And then, the subversion started, which was not even succeeded by the invaders before. Western secularism in post-independence India tried to see the Indian Sanatan Dharma way of life as a religion like Christianity and Islam. The governments cornered all the great things of the Sanatan Dharma lifestyle and gave a free hand to Islam and Christianity from the back door in the face of minority appeasement. The quest of truth, which was suggested to Indians as a primary task of human life, was lost. Indians of Independent India never knew about that fundamental call of Sanatan Dharma, so they never knew the real purpose behind all the different Yogic techniques. The Yogas became famous in urban India and western society as a fitness regime. The tradition of ‘Bhakti Yoga’ became a religious superstition for modern science-minded people. The Avatars (incarnations) who were role models in fulfilling human life’s main goal became the Gods in counter to the Gods of Islam and Christianity. The mythological characters like Ganesha, Saraswati, and Lakshmi, who were set up as yantras (spiritual tools) to concentrate the consciousness towards particular worldly and social goals, also became the Gods and Goddesses of Hindu Dharma. Conversion missionaries from Islam and Christianity used it with a counter of One God of theirs versus 33 cr. Gods of Hindus. It not only detached Indians from their real purpose in life, but it also separated humanity from the genuine Indic secularism which lived on this land for more than five thousand years. 

The Way Ahead

Now is the time for the present BJP government of India to replace the word ‘Secularism’ with the word ‘Indic Secularism’ in the fundamental structure of the constitution and declare it as an Indian way of governing and living. All the paths seeking truth are welcomed and respected, but no path is allowed to convert others into it. But if any citizen feels imprisoned or a slave to any organised religion’s framework, they can come to the Indic way of Sanatan Dharma and be free to seek the truth by any method. The government will protect their security and social well-being from any threat of violence or social discrimination. That is more extended freedom than allowing to seek truth by scientific methods only. Indic secularism allows citizens to seek truth through modern scientific and ancient spiritual or metaphysical methods. That’s it. Be secular in real terms by accepting and respecting others’ paths and following your best way, not by keeping vicious intents to convert and kill others using loopholes of democratic systems. The latter means we are still in the crusade of Islam and Christianity but with democratic weapons. We are not secular this way. We are fanatics in cover. It’s hypocrisy. Western countries have not succeeded in leaving this way because they inherit their minds from the crusading civilisation. They believe in the heart in enforcing one’s way, one’s belief; one’s God on others. They have kept the path of the crusades alive by allowing religious conversions. And that’s why their idea of secularism will lead their civilisation into the crusades again, sooner or later. But in independent India, we have invited this crusading mentality in our society by following western secularism. Time to reverse it. Let’s come to the more senior, experienced, and peaceful Indic secularism. It’s a call of the time. 

Reference:

(i) From – Secularism, Past and Future by Steven Conn, Review of Secularism: Politics, Religion, and freedom, by Andrew Copson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017)