Answer:

Secularism implies not only the separation of religion and state but also religious freedom, the autonomy of religious groups, withdrawal of state sanction for religious norms and a minimization of religious groups as categories of public policy and as actors in public life.

The debate on secularism in India has been mainly political: relationship between state and religion, interrelationship between different communities, and interdependence of secularism and democracy. A common quest connecting these three issues has been the quest for religious harmony, which in the course of time came to be identified with secularism.

However, it has been argued that secularism is not a product of religious harmony. In fact, religious harmony is achievable only if secularism is in place. This is particularly true for a multi-religious society like India. The answer to what constitutes secularism in such a society lies in the ability of the state and society to internalize values and ethics, informed by reason and humanism. It is also important to ensure that secularism is not posited exclusively within the realm of religion, but other areas of human existence, such as culture and economy are also incorporated into the secular conception.

This is important to ensure that religious differences recede to the background and a common bond unites different groups. This is why some like Pt. Nehru had also argued that secularism could be a reality only within the rubric of social justice. He had emphasized the role of economy in the construction of a secular society. According to him the real thing was the economic factor. He had argued that if were to lay stress on the economic factor, religious differences would automatically recede to the background and a common bond would unite different groups. This opinion of Nehru

has been interpreted to mean that secularism could be a reality only within the rubric of social justice. Others like Dr. Ambedkar also considered secularism not only a political issue but also a moral issue.

Further, the basic aim of secularism being to ensure equality of all religious denominations, it implies, the concept of secularism is derived from the principle of democratic equality. In fact, it has been argued that secularism gains meaning and substance only when it refers to the principle of democratic equality. Logically, a prior commitment to the principles of democracy is a condition for equality of all religious groups.

Still further, the conception of secularism as only religious harmony is based on a monolithic view of religion. Such a view does not take into account the differentiation within it. The fact is that within each culture there are several cultural and social groups between whom contradictions and complementarities exist. Due to the prevalence of the cultural and social hierarchies that exist within religion, attempts to bring about religious harmony cannot cover all followers of any religion.

Thus realizing communal harmony without creating material and ideological foundations to generate and sustain it seems extremely difficult. The importance attributed to religious harmony is indeed logical, given the reality of a multi-religious society. But it is not sufficiently inclusive to reconcile the cultural differences. For realizing inclusiveness, cultural plurality is not sufficient; what is essential is cultural equality. Integral to the concept of secularism, therefore, is cultural equality; so also are democracy and social justice. Without these three interrelated factors – equality, democracy and social justice – secularism cannot exist as a positive value in society.