Subhash
gatade
“There is in
every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.”
-Victor Hugo
-Victor Hugo
Introduction
"Keep the words God, Jesus and the devil out of the classroom."
A school teacher'smessage on the first day of the school for first-grade students had caused
tremendous consternation among a section of the parents.
She had a simple
rationale to present her proposal. With their being a public school with
children coming from different religions and beliefs joining it, she did not
"[w]ant to upset a child/parent because of these words being used,” In her
letter she had also advised them to talk to the children when they go to the
church/temple/synagogue - whatever might be the case - or discuss the issue at
home at an appropriate time and place of talking about it.”
Well, instead of
the discussion getting fixed on the slow imposition of the concept of God or
closing of child's minds it turned into a debate on students’ free speech
rights. It did not take much time for the management of the school to rescind
this proposal.
There is nothing
new about this dilemma faced by a teacher who has welfare of students at the
center of her/his concerns.
'The Guardian' haddone a similar story some time back in a different manner where the science
teacher had himself shared the dilemma inside the classroom. The teacher had described the "[a]wkward
situation of teaching something that flatly contradicts the religious beliefs
of some of their students." or meeting "[s]tudents ..who have been brought up to believe that the holy
book of their particular religion contains the literal truth about the origins
of life and the universe" but in concluding remarks had emphasised how
proper science education would equip young people to arrive at their own
decisions about what to believe, and not to believe.
One can discuss
similar experiences from different contexts and surroundings.
The task to
discuss / not discuss the concept of god and its place in society and frankly
discuss its relevance ( if any) for the subject being taught or raising
question about holding regular prayer etc becomes extremely difficult if the
institutions which manage the school/college or the parties which lead the
government - who formulate policies to dictate what to teach and not to teach -
become proactive on the issue. They use the medium of education to peddle their
conservative world view and have no qualms in spreading superstition among
them.
With the ascent of
right-wing governments in different parts of the world the phenomenon seems
quite widespread. The manner in which the idea of 'creationism' has caught
fancy among many states of USA as opposed to the scientific theory of Evolution
propounded by Darwin, is just an example to illustrate this.
No doubt countries
of the third world seem to be more susceptible such onslaughts. One can look at
well known physicist and human rights activists Prof Pervez Hoodbhoy's writings who has been discussing consistently on the plight of Pakistani education which
has been shaped by the military-Mullah complex there and how it has led to
transformation of Pakistani universities from becoming "[b]eacons of enlightenment, open inquiry, and bold new
thinking" to "sheep farms"
Of late, India -
which had displayed lot of promise at the time of independence and had made
strenuous efforts to embark a path emphasising scientific temper - seems to be
catching up with the rest of the third world at a breakneck speed. It is also true
that one also notices that lot of efforts are going on - at the individual and
collective level - to reinvigorate the spirit professed by 'founding fathers'
of the Constitution, indicating once again that the struggle is far from over
2.
It was June 2018
when BJP led state government in Rajasthan made a startling announcement. It decided toinvite Saints-Mahatmas to give lessons in moral education to the students, on
every third Saturday of the month as an extra-curricular activity..What
was more troubling that it was only few months back then that this part of
India had been witness to the turmoil caused by the cases involving two high
profile sadhus - Ram Rahim and AsaramBapu - for their involvement in sexual
assault of their followers and other black deeds, who were later convicted by
the courts. And there was enough documentary proof available to show how the saffrons
did not shy away from showering their support to them in the long winding court
battle, clearly with an eye on their mass following.
Vasundhara Raje
led government had in fact to share few blushes then when it was brought to
notice how in a chapter on saints in a Class III textbook taught in Rajasthanschools, the rape accused self-styled godman AsaramBapu had featured as a great
saint, more than two years after he was jailed for his act. It was noticed that
he was sharing the space in the text book with Vivekananda, Shankaracharya,
Mother Teresa and Ramakrishna Paramhans in the book.
A quick perusal of
the state's policies reveal that inviting Saints-Mahatmas to schools was
continuation of the process of providing 'religious tinge' to education
undertaken by it. A report published in India Today had provided details about
the ‘changes’ being undertaken there in the field of education since Raje
government had took over :
“ Since 1 st July 2015 yoga, pranayam, vandemataram,
suryanamaskar and meditation have been made compulsory at the time of school
prayers ; Saraswati Puja Worship has been made compulsory on every government
and non-government schools on BasantPanchami ; a school development committee
has been formed in every school and its meeting is compulsory on every amavasya
; Bhagwadgeeta has been made part of curriculum; and Geeta and Jail diary of
Bhagat Singh has been made mandatory in schools. Books on Integral Humanism and
SamajikSamarasta have been made part of school libraries.” ( Badalne LagiHaiShiksha,
‘India Today’3 rd August 2016, Page 21)
The move to invite
Saints-Mahatmas - most of them of dubious character - was later rescinded by
the government after its stringent criticism by intellectuals and civil society
people. Members of civil society as well as many political formations resisted
this move purely on the basis of Constitutional Provisions to the effect.
It was pointedly asked whether such schools which are provided government aid can provide religious instruction or not?
It was pointed out
that a cursory glance at the constitutional debates makes it abundantly clear
that a majority of the members - despite their own religious inclination - were
clearly of the opinion that schools, whose basic purpose was supposed to to
open minds of children and not to make them dumping ground of useless
information, should never be opened up for any type of religious instruction.
It was clear that they were seeing the perils of poisioning of minds by
religious frenzy in this part of the subcontinent and were keen that future of
independent India could be secured on secular grounds only.
The insertion of
article 28 (1) just goes to show the united resolve of our founding fathers
which clearly states that
“No religious instruction shall be provided in any
educational institution wholly maintained out of State Funds” unless
“established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious
instruction shall be imparted in such institution”.
In fact article 28
of the constitution makes it more explicit and does not leave any ambiguity as
far its implementation is concerned,
“No person attending any educational institution
recognised by the state or receiving aid out of state funds shall be required
to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such
institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such
institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such
person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto cultural and
educational rights”.
It needs to be
underlined that the expression religious instruction here has a restricted
meaning. It conveys that teaching of customs, ways of worships, practices or
rituals can not be allowed in educational institutions wholly maintained out of
State funds.
It is worth
considering whether an educational institution could impose its will on the
students vis-a-vis religious instruction under the name of moral teaching etc ?
Perhaps drafting committee of the constitution was aware of this possibility as
well at a general level and had clearly stated that any such imposition is a
breach of article 19 which says “”All citizens shall have the right -(a) to
freedom of speech and expession;”; any such imposition is also a breach of
article 25(1) which says “
“Subject to public order, morality and health and to
the other provisions of this Part, all person are equally entitled to freedom
of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate
religion.”
What was found
more disturbing that BJP government in the state then had not bothered to pay a
heed to another constitutional provision which includes under fundamental duties
“To develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and
reform”. ( Sec V, article 51 A on Fundamental duties) fully knowing that any
such sermon by these “Saints-Mahatmas” would be a strong deterrent in
development of scientific temper.
One could say that
wiser sense prevailed and the government retracted its move.
3
What Raje
government ( which has been replaced by Congress led government) tried to do
was part of a practice popularised by the BJP which was leading the government
at the center and many states.
Time and again it
has expressed their proximity not only towards a particular religion but have
promoted issues, taken up moves, courted controversial Sadhus which have had a
serious impact on the secular fabric of the constitution. The public display of
religiosity - which was unthinkable or rather muted till a few years ago- by
people holding reins of power has become a new norm these days.
Merely few months
before this order by the Rajasthan government, the MP government then led by
Shiv Raj Singh Chauhan had granted Minister of State (MoS) rank to fivereligious leaders . It was evident that the immediate trigger to make these appointments was that
few of these Sadhus had planned to take out Yatra to supposedly expose an an
alleged scam by the government.
In this era of
‘binary’ politics, it is possible to take out a similar examples from the
records of any other secular parties and show that what BJP or governments led
by it has been doing is nothing unusual.
Any such claim or
understanding which reduces the really ground breaking developments in Indian
politics merely as a ‘political change’’ would tend to miss the ‘paradigm
shift’ which is occurring (has occured) before our own eyes, thanks to the BJP
government. In fact, in a write-up commenting on Prime Minister Modi’s first Nepal trip (
August 2014) the author and well known journalist Bharat Bhushan had put itrather bluntly how a conscious attempt is on not only to legitimise ‘Hindu
rituals in the public sphere’ but ‘’create a predominantly Hindutva public
sphere that marginalises others.”( -do-)
Remember in his
very first trip to Nepal Mr Modi had made a personal visit to Pashupatinath
Temple, wearing a saffron kurta and saffron chawl, ‘wearing two strings of the
holy rudrakshabead’and had symbolically presented 2,500 kg of yellow sandalwood
to the temple authorities. He had performed a “RudraAbhishek” - a ritual
supposedly performed to please Lord Shiva. The author had raised an important
question whether it should have been done as “a representative of a secular
republic” and whether ‘gifts’ worth more than 4 crore Rs should have been given
from the funds from public exchequer should have “been linked with Modi’s
personal visit to the temple?”
He had contrasted
this public display of religiosity by the head of the state to the stand
adopted by the newly independent Indian state on the proposal for renovation of
the Somnath Temple.
“When Sardar Patel and K M Munshi went to Mahatma
Gandhi with the project, he blessed the idea but told them that people should
contribute for the renovation and not the state. Jawaharlal Nehru distanced
himself from the project. He reprimanded Munshi for writing to the Indian
Embassy in Peking asking it to “send waters from the Hoang Ho, the Yangtse and
the Pearl rivers, and also some twigs from the Tien Shan mountains” for the
reconstruction of Somnath. (-do-)
There are
innumerable other examples which go to show the conscious manner in which the
leaders of the nascent republic took steps so that the state does not appear
favourably disposed towards particular religion, maintain separation between
religion and state.
We should never forget that founders of constitution decided to move ahead on these lines in an atmosphere which had seen enough inter-communal bloodletting and killing of innocents. Despite the challenges involved in the process they resolved that unless and until we ensure separation of religion and politics similar bloodletting may occur again. The principled stand on maintaining the separation taken by Gandhi and Nehru, vis-a-vis Somnath Temple was merely a reflection of this greater concern.
4
"Prayer is a religious practice. And the
Constitution of India, via Article 28, says that no religion instruction shall
be provided in any educational institution wholly maintained out of State
funds.
...In a similar instance in the United States of America, one man had petitioned that religious prayers must not be held in schools run by State funds as the USA is a secular country. And the supreme court of America agreed with that viewpoint and passed a judgment. Now this practice of prayers has been discontinued in American schools run on government funds."
https://www.rediff.com/news/interview/if-usa-can-stop-prayers-in-schools-why-cant-india/20190130.htm
It is an
interesting coincidence that this move by the Rajasthan government ( since
rescinded) had come at a time when the highest courts of the country had been
seized of a similar matter and had even asked the government to clarify its
stand. A petition has been filed in the SC by Veenayak Shah, an advocate basedin Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh whose children had passed out of KV, which claimed
that the Hindi prayers sung during the morning prayers in over 1100 Kendriya
Vidyalaya’s promote a particular religion and hence violate the Constitution.
According to the
petition, the Hindi prayers including shlokas like ‘asto ma sadgamaya’ and
other prayers promote particular religious beliefs and thus parents of students
from religious minorities, agnostics etc. might find them “constitutionally
impermissible”. The Supreme Court had observed the petition had raised a ‘serious issue’ and
has thus issued a notice in the same.The petition
stated that such religious instruction will create a “lot of obstacles in
developing a scientific temperament among the students”. The petition insisted
that a school or any educational institution funded by state cannot propagate
any particular religion and had asked the courts to “Issue a writ of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to Respondents to forthwith
discontinue any form of Prayer from the Morning Assembly or otherwise in
Kendriya Vidhalaya Sangathans and to promote Scientific learning among the
students”
Describing the
daily routine inside a Kendriya Vidyalaya the petition contended that all the
students have to begin their day by reciting the Common Prayer also followed by
silent prayer. It added
" This practice creates a lot of obstacles in
developing a Scientific Temperament among the students as the whole idea of God
and Religious Faith is given immense priority and the same is instilled as a
thought process among the students as well. Students as a result learn to
develop an inclination towards seeking Refuge from Almighty instead of
developing a Practical Outcome towards the Obstacles and hurdles faced in
everyday life and spirit of enquiry and reform seems to be lost somewhere”
It had provided
the following grounds for filing the petition .
GROUNDS
1) The right to life enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees protection of life and personal liberty. Further, the Schools have bound the students to recite and conduct the Prayers without giving them a liberty to refrain from the same.
2) Under Article 19 of the Constitution, the citizens
have been guaranteed Freedom of Speech and expression and as a result the
students shall not be put under any compulsion to recite the prayer or even as
to recite in particular manner by folding their hands and closing their eyes.
3) Because immense emphasis is laid down on the
recitation of prayer and its importance thus curbing the growth of scientific
temperament among students and young minds.
4) The above prayer is being enforced throughout the
country in all Kendra Vidhalayas. As a result, parents and children of the
minority communities as well as Atheist and others who do not agree with this
system of Prayer such as Agnostics, Sceptisists, Rationalists and others would
find the imposition of this prayer constitutionally impermissible.
5) The above prayer is based on Hindu religion and it
is very different both in substance and form from the prayers of the other
religious/ non-religious orientations mentioned above, hence, can the state
impose the above mentioned “common prayer” on students and teachers throughout
the country.
6) In Aruna Roy & Ors. Vs. Union of
India & Ors. (1996) 3 SCC 212 held the distinction between “Religious
Instructions” and “Study of Religions. The Court held that “Special care has to
be taken for avoiding possibility of imparting “Religious Instructions” in the
name of “Religious Education”.
One learns that it
Supreme Court has placed the issue before a Constitution bench to decide the matter and it remains to be seen when the said Bench is constituted.
“A bench led by Justice Rohinton Nariman said the
question raised in a public interest litigation filed by lawyer Veenayak Shah
was of seminal importance and placed
it before the Chief Justice to refer to a Constitution bench of at least five
judges.” (-do-)
5
The importance of
this petition before the highest courts can also be gauged from the fact that
even NCERT - which is tasked by the Government of India ‘to assist and advise
the Central and State Governments on policies and programmes for qualitative
improvement in school education’ and also undertake ‘research in areas related
to school education; prepare and publish model textbooks’ etc has also noted
something amiss in the way prayers are held in school assemblies across the
country and how it alienates children from minority communities further. It was
only last year that news had appeared in a section of the media about a manual
prepared by it underlining these difficulties:
“A manual prepared by the National Council forEducational Research and Training (NCERT) has pointed out that children from
minority communities at times find the prayers in the school assemblies and
picture of gods and goddesses on the walls alien to them and has suggested some
changes including the celebration of festivals related to religious minorities
in schools, sensitive handling of these children during religious functions
celebrated in schools, and adequate representation of minority parents in the
School Management Committees (SMC).”
Emphasising that
empowerment of the socially disadvantaged groups, SCs (scheduled castes), STs
(scheduled tribes), OBCs (other backward classes) and the minorities should
remain on the priority list of the country, because these groups still lag behind
the rest of the society due to their social, economic and educational
backwardness :
“It has also noted how discriminatory practices
against these groups by teachers, peer groups and system are still prevalent in
some schools and how the school management committee should play an important
role to curtail such discrimination and provide a conducive atmosphere.”(-do)
A perusal of
judgements by various courts also corroborate the fact that judiciary tries its
best to protect the fundamental spirit of the constitution mentioned earlier.
For example, Bombay High court had held that a ‘[t]eacher cannot be forced to fold his hands while standing in the
school prayers or hold his hand in the front while taking oath of the preamble
of the Constitution.’ It had said that forcing a teacher to do so would be violation of the
fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Justice Abhay Oka and Revethi
Mohiti Dhere of the Bombay High Court had observed it while taking up the petition
of a teacher Sanjay Salwe, who worked as a teacher in Matoshri Savitribai Phule
Vidyalay in Nashik town of Western Maharashtra.
The school
authorities had penalised him for ‘indiscipline’ and refused to to give higher
pay scale for not folding his hands while prayers were being held. Teacher had
contended that the prayer sung in the school is of religious nature and
therefore he did not fold his hands. The teacher, who had an excellent record
while working in the school since 1996 had argued that he has freedom of
expression as per the Article 19 of the Constitution and,therefore,he cannot be
forced to stand with folded hands at the time when the prayers are sung.
Initially he had approached the education department, which had ruled in his
favour but when school management refused to obey its order he had directly
taken up the matter in Bombay High Court.
6
“I was not looking for a fight. All I was saying was
that compulsory prayer is contrary to Article 28 (3) of the Constitution of
India. It says that no person shall be required to take part in any religious
instruction or to attend religious worship in an educational institution funded
by the state. The Maharashtra Secondary School Code mentions the national
anthem, but not prayer.”
What needs to be
specially mentioned here that Sanjay Salve was later given Dr. Narendra
Dabholkar Memorial Award for ‘pursuing a lone legal battle that successfully
upheld a citizen’s right of not having to kneel before religious authority’ at
Swatantralokam, the Annual Conference of the Science Trust, held in Calicut,
where he was interviewed by Babu Gogineni, an Indian Humanist, rationalist, and
human rights activist, who also served as Executive Director of the International
Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) for many years.
Excerpts of the
interview would be opportune here :
“I joined the school in 1996 and for 12 years I was
given excellent ratings in my Confidential Reports. But because I did not fold
my hands while the rest of the school was praying in the School Assembly I was
asked to provide a written explanation. I explained that as a Buddhist Atheist
I did not wish to pray and that I had no obligation to do so. ..
“From then onwards, I was made to feel unwelcome. .. I
wrote to the Government repeatedly but they never responded. Only when I
approached the High Court did the District Education Officer respond to my
complaint.
“The Officer wrote to the School Management that I
could not be compelled to pray. He also said that the 30 minutes of mandatory
daily human values education means also recognising the value of secularism.
They were obliged to follow these instructions, but they did not. Even when
warned by the Government that their funding would be cut off, they did not
relent. I therefore had to approach the High Court once again to secure my
rights. After all, I stand when the prayers are said, respecting the fact that
others are praying. It is just that I do not join my hands during the religious
prayer and I do not hold out my hand during the oath taking ritual. Did the
Supreme Court of India not rule two decades ago that the 7th Day Adventists
could not be compelled to sing the National Anthem?”(-do-)
The school where
Salve taught is named after Savitribai Phule - the legendary social reformer
from 19 th century - who alongwith her friend/comrade Fatima Shekh and her
husband Mahatma Phule had started the first women's school in Pune. Savitribai
Phule belonged to Mali community, considered a lower caste in the caste
hierarchy.
The trial itself was instructive. “What is wrong with
singing the Freedom fighter Sane Guruji’s prayer? It is secular. It says true
religion should make us love humanity. It asks you to spread smiles on the
faces of the oppressed,” a judge remarked to Sanjay. After all, Sane Guruji has
an important place in the cultural history of Maharashtra – he fought to end
untouchability, and even undertook a fast unto death to get the doors of the
Pandharpur Vithoba temple opened to the untouchables.
“It is not secular because it invokes God” was Salve’s
response. “I cannot say this prayer as it says I am a child of God whereas I am
the child of my parents. I cannot be compelled to sing this prayer or be asked
to revere the religious concept of Satyam Shivam Sundaram even if it invokes
Truth and Beauty,” Sanjay contended.
The Division Bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice
Revati Mohite Dere did not agree that the prayer was religious, but found that
Salve had the fundamental right not to pray and that he could not be compelled
to do so. They ruled that folding of hands was not mandatory and that all of
Sanjay’s increments, stopped since 2008, should be paid to him by 31 January
2014.(-do-)
7
“[i]ts importance lies in the fact that educational institutions are taking it; there young people are led to understand their surroundings and their place in history. More, the last five years have seen grave assaults on the autonomy of these institutions. The opening up of the ‘religion’ option through terms ranging from ‘humanity’ to ‘non-religious’ therefore suggests both an assertion of autonomy and the desire to encourage independent thought among students.
As one awaits how the Constitution Bench deliberates on this petition about prayer in KVs or remembers/celebrates the not so little victory of Sanjay Salve it is heartwarming to see that the spirit to give a "[f]ormal welcome tofearless thinking and freedom of belief" is spreading. We have been witness to admission forms of some colleges from Calcutta this year providing new options under religion: humanity, secular, non-religious, atheism. Appears unbelievable!
Well, in an
ambience loaded with religiosity and its increasing conflation with state, it
is rather difficult to believe that some colleges may take such a creative step
to convey how they see what is happening around them? No doubt it is small step
but as noted by analysts it is an attempt to break/challenge the ‘construction
of identity, thought and social and political space, indirectly conveying the
vision of a secular and diverse India.’
The significance
of this little step can be better understood if one looks into the fact that
the elections held to the 17 th Parliament - which has returned BJP to power -
have demonstrated one more thing that BJP is the ‘the most preferred party ofyoung India’ (https://www.thehindu.com/elections/lok-sabha-2019/the-most-preferred-party-of-young-india/article27277454.ece)
It has support cutting across caste as well as class lines. It is the same BJP
which alongwith its ‘Parivar’siblings has consciously tried to conflate
religion with exercise of power and has been successful in collapsing the
majority faith into a rabid nationalism which targets difference and dissent
and other specific groups, the ‘others’ according to its worldview.
With few hundreds
or say few thousands of students seeking admission to those colleges every year
being exposed to the idea of education being imparted without any compulsion to
declare one’s religion, is definitely a welcome thing.
(To be
published in 'Indian Journal of Secularism)
