RELIGIOUS MINORITIES AND FREEDOM OF RELIGION
RELIGIOUS MINORITIES AND FREEDOM OF
RELIGION
Having done a
broader analysis of how communally sensitized forces look for chances to
discriminate people on religious grounds against the constitutional provisions
now, in this chapter we shall mainly focus on the problems associated with the
religious minorities. This is done in order to understand freedom of religion
in India
6.1
Minority Definition
The difficulty with the word minority
is that “the word ‘minority’ has not been defined in the Constitution.”[1] It
is not just in the constitution but also not defined in other places. For
example “in India India
However, “the Central Government has
notified the following as falling within the category of a ‘minority’: Muslims,
Christians, Sikhs, Parsis, and Buddhists, such a definition of minority
excludes, among others, Judaism, Jainism, and the Bahai faith.”[4] In
the simple form for our government five are minorities: Muslims, Christians,
Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsees.[5] In
the words of R. Venkataraman “at present, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists
and Zoroastrians are listed as minority communities.”[6]
The above data helps understanding the various religious minority groups in India
James Massey also suggests, “today,
there are five religious groups which have been given the official status of
National Minorities, namely, the Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, and
Parsees.”[7] He
identifies another category of minorities.
In his own words “among the religious minorities which do not enjoy an
official national status (but have their rights equally protected) are the
following three groups” Jains, Bhaha’is and Jews.”[8] He
also sheds light on the groups that may be considered as minorities as “besides
these religious groups there are other groups in north-east India
Loosely it is said “we can treat
Muslims, Christians as religious minorities at the national level because their
numerical strength compared with rest of the Indian citizens is smaller so that
they are entitled to any protections that may be designed for religious
minorities.” [10] This
looks oversimplification of the issue because besides these two major religious
minority groups there are many other minority groups. They also need to be accounted for and the
benefits for the religious minorities should reach them as well. If that is not
implicit it betrays the minorities in line with the majority community feeling
of the communal Hindus who want to absorb the other religious groups in to
them. It is generally called the process of assimilation and Hinduism is best
known for it.
The word ‘minority’ has not been
defined in the Indian Constitution and it does not lay down sufficient
indication to test the determinants of a group as minority[11]
yet it recognizes two types of minorities particularly linguistic and
religious. Sunita Gangwal writes “…to be more precise and scientific it is
appropriate to comment that Indian constitution recognizes only two types of
minorities based on language and religion and also those based both in
combination.”[12] In India India
A different but intriguing definition
in support of the majority or in protecting the interest of the Hindutva agenda
is that “any section of the citizens,
being small in number in a definite area, in respect of religion, language or
on any other ground, seeking equal or preferential treatment either to maintain
its identity or to be assimilated with the majority, is a minority.”[13]
This view suggest that even in some places the Hindus will become minority for
example where the other religious communities are more in number compared to
Hindus. In support of this viewpoint it is suggested “Article 29 though
provides protection to the interests of the minorities, yet it does not refer
to the numerically less minorities. It actually refers to any section of
citizens, who may belong to a majority community. For example, members of Hindu majority living
in Punjab or Nagaland will have protection for
their linguistic or cultural rights, where Sikhs and Christians are in majority
respectively.”[14] This in fact further complicates the issue of
defining the expression minority.
Although the constitution does not
speak about numerical minority it needs to be remembered “the present
definition on which the Indians are depending is given to them by the
judiciary, according to which any community which is numerically less then 50
percent of the population.”[15]
Having analyzed many of the explanations of the courts it is stated that, “it, however, logically follows from the
language used by the courts in the judgments reviewed that they may find
themselves prepared to ascertain a minority with reference to the entire
population of the country if the law in question happens to be a union law.”[16]
It means the scope of the content of minority is liable to change in relation
to the context.
Whether the numerical consideration is
unbiased or not, it is very important to remember that the constitution does
not give any special rights to the minorities, but articles twenty nine and
thirty safeguard the rights of the minorities.[17]
Particularly Article thirty guarantees fundamental rights to the religious and
linguistic minorities.
It is essential to consider some of
the recent directives of the judiciary in connection with the issues of
minorities. In the view of the Supreme Court, listing religious groups as
minority communities should be discouraged and the existing list eventually done
away with. The logic behind such guidelines is that classifying communities on
the basis of religion promotes divisive tendencies and weakens the nation. It
is worth mentioning the following concern of the Judges, “the bench of Chief
Justice R.C. Lahoti and Justices D.M. Dharmadhikari and P.K. Balasubramanyan
said in a 22 page judgment the “goal of the Constitution is to create social
conditions where there is no need to shield or protect rights of minority or
majority communities”.[18] The bench made the observation while
rejecting the appeal of the Jain community for minority status under section 2
(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act. The court has shifted the
burdens from the minorities to the government. It is also a lesson that the
failures of the governments in maintaining equality of the citizens are
furthering the minority issues.
The
court’s direction to the Minority Commission is also in line with the previous
concern that “the minorities commission, “instead of encouraging claims from
different communities for being added to a list of notified minorities under
the Act, should suggest ways and means to help create social conditions where
the list of notified minorities is gradually reduced and done away with
altogether”, the court said.”[19]
It is true that increasing the list of the minorities is not the solution to
the problems of minorities, particularly religious minorities. The main agenda
should be to see that the minorities particularly the religious minorities are
not denied their rights principally freedom of religion.
Again
dividing the society in the name of minority on any ground is not a healthy
solution. The menace of such division is that
“if, only on the basis of a different religious thought or less
numerical strength or lack of health, wealth, education, power or social
rights, a claim of a section of the Indian society to the status of minority is
considered and conceded, there would be no end to such claims in a society as
multi-religious and multi-linguistic as India is”.[20]
The point is in a pluralist nation like India
Having analyzed the issues involved in
defining who are the minorities in India
The three concerns that they should be
non-document group, numerically sufficient to protect their traditions and
heritages and should be loyal to the nation are very useful. In that case India
Still further “Article 27 of the International
Convenant(sic) on Civil and Political Rights does not define the expression but
gives the following right to them: “in those states in which ethnic, religious
or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not
be denied the right, in community with the other members of the group, to enjoy their own
culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own
language.”[22] It is
noteworthy that freedom of religion is one of the main concerns the
international community is apprehensive about in relation to the minorities.
The issue of minority can be
considered from the international justice point of view as well. For instance
“the Permanent Court Of International Justice Of The League of Nations
interpreted minority to refer to those people who ‘live in a given country or
locality, have a race, religion, language and traditions of their own, and are
united by this identity of race, religion, language and traditions in a
sentiment of solidarity, with a view to preserving their traditions, maintain
their own form of worship, ensure the instruction and upbringing of their
children in accordance with the spirit and tradition of their race and render
mutual assistance to each other’.”[23] Again “in international law the term is used
in the restricted sense to refer to a kind of class/group of population which
differs from the dominant group within a state.”[24] By
all means the primary concern is that the minorities and their rights should be
protected.
Although the definitions are broad one
thing we are clear is that the minorities have the right to adhere to religion
of their own. Their right for freedom of religion is protected at all occasions
in all places. Religious discrimination is one among the possible
discriminations identified from the point of minorities all over. This means
freedom of religion is universal and that cannot be curtailed.
6.2
A Biased Attempt to Derogatively Define the Term
In India India Kashmir . The real purpose is
to thwart religious rights and protections to people belonging to religious
traditions other than the so-called Hindu.
The framers of the Indian constitution
have taken all the efforts to safeguard the religious minorities in view of the
multi-religious context in India
The ugly design of discriminating and
degrading humanity on religious ground is explicit in the view of communally
charged writers. For example “a minority is always an organized community bound
by ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious ties distinct from the majority dominant
group and other minority groups. Such a group is often the subject of social
prejudices and segregation and political discrimination by the majority group
in power. Socially, the members of such a group remain as untouchables and
politically as second class citizens.”[27]
The arrogance of communal forces to call other religious communities as
suspicious and subject to discriminations, untouchables and second-class
citizens is vivid here.
The faulty notion that the religious
minority will be disloyal to the nation is an incorrect portrayal. The simple fact is that the communal groups
desire that the religious minority should not have any freedom of religion.
They should be treated as second-class citizens deserving ill treatment and
underprivileged. The simple erroneous
wish is that the numerically majority should have say on every matter and the
others should not have. Unfortunately the Hindus being a numerically stronger
group in India
In the light of the possibility of the
minority rights being manipulatively misused it is objected, “the minority
concept does not augur well for a secular state… In a secular state there is no
such things as minority since every body has the same rights, status and
obligations as any body else.”[28] This is true in the light of the constitution
as well. It does not give extra privileges rather protects the constitutional
provisions which otherwise the minorities may not be in a position to protect
and enjoy. All the constitutional rights are for the entire citizens of India
6.3
History of Minorities in India
The issue of the minority-religious,
linguistic, ethnic, etc is universal. One of the main reasons for the
conception of minority is migration. James Massey gives the following
historiography about the origin and development of minorities in India India India India India India India Persia
After giving a brief history of the
minorities in India India
James Massey’s information on the
constitutional provisions, which are concerned with the religious minorities in
India India India
Although the above sketch history is
inadequate it points to the necessity for considering some more groups as
minorities. It also unveils that the constitution treats every one equally and
sees that the minorities enjoy their portion.
The constitution makes provisions for other possible safeguards in
protecting the basic rights of the minorities including the religious
minorities.
6.4
Minority Commission
Minority Commission is not the direct
dictation of the constitution but it has provisions to form these mechanisms to
monitor the concerns of the minorities, here mainly religious minorities. As a
result, “the Minorities Commission was first constituted in 1978 by a
Government of India Resolution dated 12 January 1978 to look into the welfare of minorities.”[32]
The purpose of the Minorities Commission was to evaluate the working of the
various constitutional safeguards for the protection of minorities and
religious groups and to ensure their ‘effective implementation and
enforcement’.”[33] In other
words for the interests of the minorities, in fact, the first instrument
created by the central government is the National Commission for Minorities.
Initially, it functioned as a department of the Home Ministry at the Centre but
was later attached to the Ministry of Welfare till 1992.[34]
It was in 1992 that the Parliament
passed the National Commission for the Minorities Act, giving it full statutory
authority.[35] To
elaborate it further “to make the
functioning of the Minorities commission more effective, the Indian Parliament
passed the National Commission for Minorities Act in 1992 and gave it a
statutory status and renamed it as the ‘National Commission for Minorities’
defining the new role of the Commission, the Act empowers it to ‘monitor the
working of the safeguards provided in the Constitution and in laws enacted by
Parliament and the State Legislatures’.”[36]
The purpose of the Act was to better address the interests of minorities in an
organized and effective manner.[37]
In furthering the cause of the
minorities the second instrument, which came into existence as a result of the
recommendations of the National Commission for Minorities, and which needs a
special mention is NMDFC. It was established on 30 September 1994 .[38] Since the issue of minorities is a concrete
one “besides these two instruments, there is also a special programme known as
the ‘Prime Minister’s 15-point Programme for Minorities’ in existence since
1983….”[39]
Regarding the effectiveness of the
Minority commission the following concerns are raised. For example the
“Minority Commission is constituted by Chairman and members who are invariably
from minority communities. Can minority survive if it has no faith in the good
will of majority? Can such a commission be not dubbed as biased and prejudicial
with preconceived notions. Why should not a Minority Commission have Chairman
some member belonging to the majority community. Further all minorities should
get representation on the commission.”[40]
There are certain limitations to the
commission in achieving its objectivity. James Massey writes “though the
National Commission for Minorities has been empowered with the powers of a
civil court, yet lacks the power of implementing its findings and
recommendations.”[41]
Presently it can only send its recommendations to the central and state
governments. They in turn place the matter in the parliament and state
legislature respectively. Of course few states have also instituted minority
commissions.
The purpose for which the minority
commission was established needs appreciation. But unfortunately, due to
various structural and functional constrains, the minority commission can
enquire a matter of concern and present the findings to the appropriate bodies.
It has no judicial power. It has to wait for the verdicts of the other judicial
organs. Thus more often than not the functioning of this commission and its
outcome are gravely questioned.
In spite of the limitations we need to
value the efforts of the governments in power, which have taken committed
efforts to protect the rights and privileges of the minorities, including
religious, in line with the provisions of the constitution of India India
6.5
Hindutva Perception of other Religious Communities
Unfortunately the Hindus being the
numerically dominant group inculcated the evil of denying freedom of religion
to others. They want the religious minorities to disclaim religious freedom.
The minorities should be assimilated in to the so-called majority religious
system. And the religious minorities should not grow in number (population) and
finally they should surrender to the whims and fancies of the religious
majority. It is a flat denial of religious freedom opposed to civilization. It
is said, “if the first stage be called parākrama-vād (assimilation-ism)
and the second, sankuchitata-vād (contraction-ism), then this can be
called sharanāgati-vād (surrender-ism).”[42]
The communally charged fundamental
forces in India India
The system of assimilation in Hinduism
has temporarily curtailed the spread and progress of many indigenous religions.
This is considered as threat to the existence of other religions. We are in an
age where religious plurality is an accepted way of life. Respecting other
religion and people is the order of the day. But here is a group, which says
that other religious communities cannot have the constitutional right of
complete religious freedom. M.S. Golwalkar writes, “if, even after fulfilling
all those various duties in social life, anybody says that he has studied Quran
Sherif or the Bible and that way of worship strikes a sympathetic chord in his
heart, that he can pray better through that path of devotion, we have
absolutely no objection. Thus he has his choice in a portion of his individual
life. For the rest, he must be one with the national current. That is real
assimilation.”[44] The
proposal is extremely intolerant in nature. Its main objective is to subjugate
the other religious communities and dictate terms and condition to them. No one
can practice two religious elements at the same time. But the Hindutva elements
want other religious communities to pray in one form and to do the rest of the
religious activity in another form.
Rather than asking people to follow
the national code and respect the constitution the Hindutva forces want others
to follow Hindu code of life. This has been put, as “any one was welcome to
stay here. But all of them were required to act up to our national codes and
conventions.” [45] Every
religious community in India
Their assertive claim for an unethical
and uncivilized principle is very clear. There is no element of acceptance or
accommodative or harmonious nature in them. They claim, “this is our concept of
Hindu Nation and our attitude towards the non-Hindus residing here-the only
rational, practical and right approach.”[46]
If Hindutva ask for national
principles or sentiments they are acceptable. The forces are really asking
every one to follow Hindu principles and Hindu nationalism. Their perpetual
toil to advocate a nationalism based upon Hinduism is provocatively stated as,
“the conclusion that we arrive at is that all those communities which are
staying in this land and yet are not true to their salt, have not imbibed its
culture, do not lead the life which this land has been unfolding for so many
centuries, do not believe in its philosophy, in its national heroes and in all
that this land has been standing for, and are, to put it briefly, foreign to
our national life. And the only real, abiding and glorious national life in
this holy land of Bharat has been of the Hindu People.”[47]
It looks the fundamentals are
suggesting that one cannot exclusively be loyal to one religion. He or she has
to mix the religious elements. In other words read one scripture, pray in one
way and accept the religious principles of Hindus. The simple impracticable
agenda is that only Hindus alone can live in India India
The unforgivable crime to which this
fundamental forces are succumbed is to denigrate those who reveal and unveil
these hidden agendas. Not just slandering them but also portraying them as
antinational. The secular character of
the central governments are often caricatured as “however, the present attempts
are such as to discredit the Hindus and, through the appeasement policy, to
make the non-Hindus more aggressive in their already existing aggressive
designs. In this way, the heritage and the tradition of Hindus are being
insulted, making them imbecile and incapable of defending themselves. ”[48]
One thing is very clear that the secular governments really obstruct the
execution of Hindu communal agenda in this nation which is exclusively plural
in all realms. Still it is the good will and wisdom of the people who are
committed to secularism and democracy that prevails against the parochial
interests of the Hindu communal forces.
We do not know why the so-called Hindu
majority has to be so vehemently hatch plans to eliminate Islam and
Christianity from India India
It is very clear that the Hindu
communal and fundamental forces will go to any level to destabilize other
religious communities on any false grounds. It ranges from disrespect to
religion, culture, nation, religious heroes, betraying the nation etc. Their hatred to the Muslim community is so
acute.
6.6
Hindutva and Muslims
It is history that we have the Arabs
in India India Sind
in 712 A.D. the muslim interest in India India India India India
In the process of intimidating the
Indian Muslims it is argued, “it was naturally hoped and expected that those
Muslims who stayed back would live down their pact, discard their separatist
demands and join the national mainstream. But this hope has belied. Muslim
problems have re-emerged and votaries of Islamism have reverted to their
pre-partition game.”[51]
This may be true when they are pressed hard and they are left without any
choice. It is not true fully because the Muslims in India
To divide the religious minorities and
deprive their religious freedom the communal forces are grading the minority
religious communities. Pannalal Dhar writes, “while the Christians were not
belligerent in their attitude towards Hindus and did not desecrate temples, the
Muslims belligerency is present even to-day.”[52]
Although Muslims and Christians are subject to same kind of atrocities from the
so-called Hindu majority, the Hindu communal forces project Christians as
better than Muslims. This is not their true accepted comment. The real
intention is to divide these two progressive communities and gain control one
after the other. The seeming good will towards the Christians here will become
the hate will later. The main thing is that first they wanted to corner the
Muslims.
However the history of the conflict between
the Hindus and Muslims are traced back to early freedom struggle. Sunita
Gangwal writes, “the rivalry between the two major communities of India India India
The simple agenda of this communal
force is to see that the younger Indians, particularly the votaries of
Hinduism, should be poisoned with the view that the Mugals were the invaders
and destroyed Hinduism and Hindus. They do not want to credit to their other contributions.
Thus they say, the national history of the Muslims period should be re-written
giving the truth without varnish.[54]
The Hindu attempt to rewrite the history is always motivated towards division
and making one society to clash with the other. The simple agenda is to ask for
an unachievable and inapplicable and irrelevant Hindu India.
The real anger against the Muslims are
vented as “they had come here as
invaders. They were conceiving themselves as conquerors and rulers here for the
last twelve hundred years. That complex was still in their mind. History has
recorded that their antagonism was not merely political. Had it been so, they
could have been won over in a very short time. But it was so deep-rooted that
whatever we believed in, the Muslim was wholly hostile to it. If we worship in
the temple, he would desecrate it. If we carry on bhajans and car
festivals, that would irritate him. If we worship cow, he would like to eat it.
If we glorify woman as a symbol of sacred motherhood, he would like to molest
her. He was tooth and nail opposed to our way of life in all aspects-religious,
cultural, social, etc. he had imbibed that hostility to the very core. His
number also was not small. Next to the Hindu’s his was the largest.”[55]
Here the Muslims are willfully portrayed as offenders of the Hindu religious
and national sentiments. Of course this is only a means to reach the goal of
political power and thereby subjugate all other religious communities. This
villainous plan is unveiling in their worry about the increase in the number of
Muslims.
The Hindutva forces are in the process
of mobilizing big forces to confront the Muslims. This campaign is carried out
in many forms. Their main agenda is put fourth as “but to tell the pugnacious
fighting Mussalman that his forefathers were Hindus, that he should return to
the Hindu fold as a self-respecting man, that he should give up his aggressive
mode of the Moghul days and wake up to the realities of the present century and
merge in the national current of life- to tell all this required an unshakable
conviction in the supremacy of truth and indomitable courage to face the hard
realities of the situation.”[56]
Not stopping with it the Parivar go
back and suggest that such defense was always there and it needs to be
continued more aggressively and in more horrifying and bloody ways. It is also
claimed that “even during the days of Muslim domination great saints and sanyasins
rose to continue that tradition.”[57]
The plot of the Hindu fundamental
forces is so deep that it will work against the confidence of the Muslims. In
other words things are presented in such a way that there will be perpetual and
unquenchable tension and enmity now and in the future. This evil design is
stated as “it would be suicidal to delude ourselves into believing that they
have turned patriots overnight after the creation of Pakistan Pakistan India
The struggle for the Muslim Minority
in India India Delhi Rampur Lucknow Pakistan
The communally fundamental group fails
to understand the basic sentiment of the other religious groups. While the
whole world is pondering as to live together with religious differences here is
a fundamental group, which has a very primitive mode of thinking. Their
animosity to the freedom of others particularly, religious freedom, is implicit
in the statements “in fact, all over the country wherever there is a masjid or
a Muslim mohalla, the Muslims feel that it is their own independent territory.
If there is a procession of Hindus with music and singing, they get enraged
saying that their religious susceptibilities are wounded. If their religious
feelings have become so sensitive as to be irritated by sweet music then why
don’t they shift their masjids to forests and pray there in silence?”[60]
If the Hindu fundamentals turn the question to themselves and introspect, that
will be rewarding in the direction of relevant and positive thinking about
other religious communities in India
Rather than positively thinking about
constructive relations the Hindu communal forces always envy the progress of
the religiously minority communities in India India India Pakistan India India
The recent attacks on the Muslims by
the RSS are based on baseless and untimely presumptions. Ram Puniyani writes,
“the attack on them and consequent ghettoisation was preceded and accompanied
hate campaign against them. This hate campaign, was based on the misinformation
which was actively propagated by the SP and later became the part of ‘social
common sense’. Also that the Muslims are responsible for the Partition, they
are more loyal to Pakistan India
In the Sang Parivar’s communalizing of
events there will be some hidden agenda. I. Arul Aram points out ,“thus, the
building of the Ram temple was not a real goal but a symbol of a larger saffron
agenda. It was not merely about building a temple at Ayodhya but about
asserting Hindu supremacy and marginalizing religious minorities, particularly
Muslims. The demolition of the 16-century-old Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in 1992
and the hype that preceded that were attempts at Hindu consolidation. This was
done to counter the emergence of the Third Front which led to self-assertion by
backward classes in the late 1980s. Hindu militant organizations have always
resorted to the Ayodhya issue whenever faced with a political crisis such as
Uttar Prasesh Assembly elections. There is a nexus between politicians and
religious leaders.”[63]
Having no ideology or issue to stand
by, the communal forces are bent on constantly perpetuating hatred against the
Muslim community. It is declared, “there has been a systematic creation of
myths against the Muslims that successive governments pampered and appeased the
community, that they are polygamous, that their fertility rates are higher and
that they are anti-national.”[64]
The Hindutva’s hypocrisy is stark when
they meet the elections. During election campaigning the language changes. In the words of Ram Puniyani “as far as
Muslims are concerned a double strategy is in operation to seek their votes.
Suddenly BJP has realized that Muslims are ‘blood of our blood and flesh of our
flesh’, while RSS is projecting the ISI agent image of Muslims and VHP
regularly comes out with its fresh ‘demolition’ list which includes more
mosques.”[65] Of
course this is the main agenda. The Hindu communal forces wants to grab the
power first through communal hatred and violence and slowly to implement their
Hindutva agenda.
The reasons for the Muslim fear and
the possibility of overcoming such fears and the likelihood of witnessing
improved Muslim contribution is stated as “if we, as Indians, make the minority
feel less unloved, if we reduce their insecurities, if they feel that their
culture is not under attack by the Hindus, changes for the better will come
from the Muslims themselves.”[66]
Attempting to curb one’s constitutional religious freedom amounts to attempting
to erode the religious identity of a religious community.
In every event the Muslims and their
activities are interpreted as antinational. For example about the recent
developments in the Aligarh
Muslim University
Contrary to the
Sang Parivar’s communally characterized charges against the Muslims in India India
ISSUES relating to
the social, economic and political status of India June
14, 1983 , the Dr. Gopal Singh Committee maintained that there was a
“sense of discrimination prevailing among the minorities” and that it “must be
eliminated, root and branch, if we want the minorities to form an effective
part of the mainstream”.
The
examination of the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim
community by the seven-member high-level committee headed by Justice Rajinder
Sachar, constituted by the Manmohan Singh government, and the publication of
its report in November represents, on the face of it, a continuation of the
debate on the community. Even so, on account of a variety of factors, the work
of the Sachar committee and its report have greater significance and relevance
than earlier initiatives.[68]
The specific context in which the
committee worked makes the Hindu communal claim null and void. Venkitesh
Ramakrishnan writes, “the context in which the Sachar Committee undertook its
work is significant. The sustained campaign of the Hindutva-oriented Sangh
Parivar and its political arm, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), accusing
secular parties of promoting a policy of “Muslim appeasement” and insinuating
that the Muslim community was politically and socially “anti-national” provides
this.”[69]
The
committee’s findings are contextual and bring to light the deprived situation
of the Muslim community in India
In the words of the committee the
real situation of the Muslims in India
The long
discussion on the Hindutva version of the Muslim firmly establishes that the
Hindutva claims are utterly false and they have involved in false and
groundless slandering in order to become the political champions of this
nation. And hence it can be affirmatively concluded that the Sang Parivar is
committed to divide the nation on religious grounds. This is done by way of
unrecognizing the other religious communities in India India
6.7
Hindutva and Christianity
It was maintained earlier that the
Hindutva presents Christianity as lesser evil than the Muslims in order to
divide these two religious communities so that a united struggle against the
programs designed to abolish freedom of religion to the religious minorities in
India India
Although the communal forces credit
Christianity with less aggressive motives the Christians are also now targeted
and disturbed allover. The Christians are pictured as antinational and
supporters of British. A wrong portrayal of the Christian participation in the
freedom struggle is given as “so, in general, the Christians kept themselves
aloof from the freedom struggle.”[72]
This is fully erroneous because eminent Christian leaders have enormously
contributed to the nation building in India
More than the Muslims the Christians
are accused of proselytizing as well.
M.S. Golwalkar maintains, “during the war of independence in 1857, some
bishops here has raised platoons to help the British Government in suppressing
the uprising. Since then, they were always on the side of the British who,
after all, belonged to their own faith. The British too were helping the
Christian missionary activities in various ways.”[73]
It is not true that the Christians in India
Further, the communal forces do not want to
see the church existing or exerting desirable influence on the society. Hence all the philanthropic activities are
interpreted as attempts to increase the number of churches in India
Even after independence the communally
flavored fundamental forces are thinking that India India
The false accusations against
Christianity are always poised without any hesitation. When Christians ask for
their rights it is always connected with their religion. For example what
happens in the northeast region of India Assam Naga Hills is all engineered by the
Christian missionaries was accepted even by Pandit Nehru.”[76]
It is untrue. The real problem in the northeastern part of India India India India
Often the terror networks in this
country, which have connection with the neighboring countries, are falsely
connected to the Christians. It is claimed, “the American arms which come to Pakistan Assam India
The communal and divisive mechanism is
always in operation, as “so long as the Christians here indulge in such
activities and consider themselves as agents of the international movement for
the spread of Christianity, and refuse to offer their first loyalty to the land
of their birth and behave as true children of the heritage and culture of their
ancestors, they will remain here as hostiles and will have to be treated as
such.”[78]
The communal forces in India
The present relation between the
communal forces and the Christians in India
The above incidents are confirmed and
condemned as “most of the inquiries by social activists, National Human Rights
Commission and the National Minorities Commission have shown that different
organizations affiliated to SP are behind these attacks, and the attacks are
taking place mostly on the BJP-ruled States, Gujarat in particular.”[82]
This is willfully done in order to strengthen communal political organizations.
It is also assumed that the communally
oriented political groups have found success in such divisive propaganda and
activity and want to experiment with Christianity as well. It is said, “the
anti-Christian bogey comes at a time when the anti-Muslim pogroms have more are
less ‘achieved’ the target ‘of permanently intimidating and ghettoizing them.
Also SP realizes that if it has to break the electoral jinx to be able to come
to power on its own it needs a new vote bank and for this adivasis have become
the prime target. There is also a growing realization in SP that after
conversion to Christianity the adivasis become more educated and aware of their
rights, and this is a big threat to ‘status quo’ which is the basis of SP
politics.”[83] As it
was pointed out earlier the Hindu communal forces wants to preserve and
continue a unequal society divided on the lines of religion and caste. There
interest is not on human liberation along with the rest of the creation rather
enslaving them.
To achieve the political ends they
always used provocative and intimidating interpretations. Either they
communalize or exploit in the name of religion, culture, language, nationalism,
etc. Their designs can be understood as
“the ideology enunciated by Mr. Sudarshan reiterates the basic premises
of this organization. As per this there will shortly be an epic battle between
Hindus and anti-Hindus after which Hindutva will be the exclusive guiding
principle of the nation. Already attempts are underway to undermine the secular
democratic Constitution. The minorities are being given multiple dictates like
they should identify with Hindu gods- Ram and Krishna
– in order to join the ‘mainstream’ of the country. They are also advised to
use the suffix Hindu after their religion to show that Hinduism is not just a
religion but a culture. Also Christians in particular should break their
religious links with their churches, which are located in Vatican etc. and form
‘Swadeshi’ churches. There was a demand to throw away the ‘foreign’
missionaries.”[84] The
Hindutva forces will be happy if Indian society always remains underdeveloped
and uncivilized.
Their allegations are again argued to
be false and groundless like, “it is true that the Indian Christians are among
the religious minorities, but somehow their presence has been wrongly linked up
with the rule of the Europeans, particularly the colonial rule of the British,
which, in fact is not true.”[85]
The constitution of India establishes
that no one shall be discriminated on religious grounds but unfortunately the
Dalits who accept Christianity for various reasons are deprived their
privileges, which their counterparts are enjoying in other religions.[86]
Whether mere change of religion amounts to deprivation of government privileges
otherwise applicable to the people is a question needs sincere answer.
6.7.1
Christian Institutions
The good and benevolent contributions
of the Christian churches in all realms of life, especially in the realm of
education, are wrongly construed and distortedly interpreted to convey the
fabricated message that the Christians are still loyal to the British and
arrogant to the level of ignoring the government provisions. Without consideration
to the constitutional provisions and privileges guaranteed to the religious
minorities in order to place them on par with the other majority groups, it is
often decried that the Christian institutions enjoy extraordinary privileges
and when the Hindus ask for them, it is being called communal. Such notions are
found in the Hindutva writings, as “the Christian institutions, which even to
this day fly the Union Jack on August 15 and carry on fanatic Christian
propaganda, have no fear of losing their Government grants. On the other hand,
if a Hindu educational institution starts Hindu prayers and Gita recitation,
Government comes down with a heavy hand with threats to stop its grants.”[87]
One important thing the Hindutva
forces forget is that they fail to cognize the privileges the Christians
institutions are entitled along with other religious minorities only to improve
their standing in the society. It is not to be seen as one enjoying more
privileges and the other less. If the majority communities also ask for same
extras there will be increased conflicts and not resolutions. Equality, and
peace will never be attainable. Another thing to be remembered is that nothing
is done in violation of the provisions of the constitution. As the Hindu
communal forces are envious of the
consideration given to the religious minorities, especially Christian, they are
also unhappy with the religious activities of the Christians in India
6.7.2
Opposition to Christian Missionaries
In their fanatic tussle with the religious
minorities the communal forces even are willing to deny the merits of academic
and intellectual contributions rendered by the Christians. For example it is
said “it was a foreign Christian missionary, who first toured every town and
village in Tamil Nadu about eighty years ago and carried on an incessant and
vicious propaganda that Tamil culture, Tamil language and everything Tamil
differed fundamentally from the rest of the Bharatiya culture, language, etc.,
and that the Tamilians formed an independent nation by themselves.”[88]
Whether the contribution is from the missionary or anyone, no one can deny the
voluminous effect this has made to Tamil literature, society, culture, religion
and politics. It was this insight helped the Tamils to fight all form of the
prevalent caste oppressions.
While
admitting the social background, which gave way to much of the Christian
influence in India India India
Parekh continuous his comments on the
Christian missionary work, as “the most objectionable feature of this work is
that there are in it all the elements of a State within a State, a kind of Pakistan India India
6.7.
3 Dalit Christians
The Christian missionary work because
of the freedom of religion it enjoyed under the constitution of India
The shortcoming and the need for
rectification of the order have been pointed out, as “unfortunately the
President also fixed ‘religion’ as a criterion according to which only those
historically oppressed groups will be included in the list, who will profess
Hindu religion. This is the reason why the third paragraph, which followed the
list of the Scheduled Castes read as “Not with-standing anything contained in
paragraph 2, no person who professes a religion different from Hindu, shall be
deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste”.
This paragraph was amended by Parliament in 1956 to “Hindu or Sikh” and
in May 1990 to “Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist”.”[92]
This is very important from the point
of the constitution for the articles 15 and 25 bar any discrimination on
religious ground. It will imply to this order as well. It is quite amazing that
in a secular country no discrimination is possible on religious grounds but in India
People’s status cannot be judged on
the basis of their religious affiliation, because people of all religious
persuasion suffer different forms of backwardness. This is indicated, as “Christians
of Scheduled Caste Origin suffer the same social, educational and economic
disabilities, which their counterparts in other religions suffer.”[94]
A. Philomin Raj maintains, “because of
the traditional discriminatory practices, Dalit Christians are socially
backward, economically poor and politically powerless. Immediately after India
His major contention with regard to
this order is that, “the various government Acts and Rules passed by the
Parliament to give special protection to the Scheduled Castes, are not
applicable to the Christians of the Scheduled Caste Origin.”[97]
Most of the efforts taken to set right the lapse also failed. This grievance
calls for an applicable solution from the respective governments in power.
The following is an example to show
that efforts are on to persuade the governments to consider this grievance. For
instance the Centre for Public Interest Litigation came forward to file a writ
petition to scrap the para 3 of the Constitution Scheduled Caste (Presidential)
Order 1950 as it discriminates against the Christians of Scheduled Caste Origin
on the basis of religion that is against the constitution. On 25 October 2004 , the
Supreme Court asked for the opinion of the Attorney General of the issue of
extending constitutional benefits to the Christians of Scheduled Caste origin.
The Attorney General filed the objections of the Government for a review of the
Presidential Order.
Brushing
aside the objections, the Supreme Court has issued notice to the government on 11th April 2005 .
It was argued that the constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order 1950 as it stood
today violated the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the
Constitution as the Scheduled Castes converting to Christianity were deprived
of the benefit given to those from the same community belonging to other
religions. It was pointed out that Scheduled Castes converts to Christianity
were still suffering from the social disabilities of the community including
untouchability and that there cannot be any distinction between the Scheduled
Castes converts to Sikhism and Buddhism and the Scheduled castes converts to
Christianity.[98]
The position of the Government in this
matter is still undecided. It is pointed out that “the Government disputed the
jurisdiction stating that this issue is not a part of the domain of the
judiciary but the Supreme Court did not agree to this contention laying the
burden on the Government to file its reply to the petition and the Government
seems to have referred this matter to the Political Affairs Committee.”[99]
One thing is clear that the Christians
are not entitled to the provisions and the privileges their counterparts enjoy
under other religions. There was no rectification to this day. This tendency
adversely affects the minorities. That is why it is maintained ”the fact that
change of religion has not changed the socio-economic and educational status of
the Dalit Christians has been proved by the number of Commissions appointed by
the government and by the Judiciary.”[100]
While changing from one religion to another is the prerogative of the
individual concerned he or she cannot be deprived of the protections and
privileges of the government on the ground of changing religion.
Having
analyzed the Hindutva notion of Muslims and Christians in India
6.8
Muslims and Christians
The communal forces are mainly
targeting two main religious communities in India
In contrast to the above point again
M.S. Golwalkar writes, “we are not so mean as to say that with a mere change in
the method of worship an individual ceases to be a son of the soil. We have no
objection to God being called by any name whatever. We, in the Sangh, are
Hindus to the core. That is why we have respect for all faiths and religious
beliefs. He cannot be a Hindu at all who is intolerant of other faiths. But the
question before us now is, what is the attitude of those people who have been
converted to Islam or Christianity?”[102]
It looks when some one changes religion he or she loses his or her
nationalistic status. This is a notorious idea. Although it was accepted in his
earlier statements that change of religion does not affect a person’s
nationalistic spirit, now there is a self-contradiction.
M.S. Golwalkar writes, “together with
the change in their faith, gone is the spirit of love and devotion for the
nation.”[103] Here
is one more helpless attempt to confuse religious sentiments with nationalism,
which is the agenda of the communal forces.
People’s freedom to adhere to a
specific religion and their sentimental attachment to that religion is often
falsely construed. For example “they have also developed a feeling of
identification with the enemies of this land. They look to some foreign lands
as their holy places.”[104]
Some how the communal forces do not like people to have religious freedom. Such
freedom is considered as unpatriotic and narrated as “so we see that it is not
merely a case of change of faith, but a change even in national identity. What
else is it, if not treason, to join the camp of the enemy leaving their
mother-nation in the lurch?”[105]
The Hindu communal forces are in the verge of losing their religious grip on
matters. Hence connecting it with crafty nationalism is the available option
for them.
In the name of faulty nationalism they
want to exploit the people using traditional religious elements. It is said,
“how can you say that we should call such people nationals who, while living
here, work against the honour and traditions of the country, and insult our
national heroes and objects of national veneration?”[106]
As per nationalism no body can be a traitor but in matters of religion each
religion has to be respected. Nothing should be forced upon to dilute and hurt
the sentiment of others. Similarly nationalism and religious fundamentalism
cannot be mixed.
The Hindu communal political
organization is committed to grab power on the pretext that the number of
Hindus in India
Since the communal political parties
are targeting on gaining political power through religious hatred they see all
the developments in other religions suspiciously. One such example is the
Hindutva perception of increase in other religious communities particularly,
Islam and Christianity. This is indicated, as “it was not propagation of
religion, but a political strategy under its garb.”[108]
All these are evidence to the Hindutva aspiration to grab power and force Hindu
religion on others.
The intimidating and ridiculing agenda
comes in the form of sugarcoated nationalism. It is maintained, the answer to
the so-called problem of ‘religious minorities’ can be found only in the
historically correct, rational and positive approach of Hindu Rashtra.
Otherwise, the so-called minorities are bound to become more and more hardened
in their separate shells of religion and turn into a dreadful source of
disruption of our body-politics. So, all that is expected of our Muslim and
Christian co-citizens is the shedding of the notions of their being ‘religious
minorities’ as also their foreign mental complexion and merging themselves in
the common national stream of this soil.’[109]
The communal forces are asking the Indians again to become Indians. It is
nothing but sign of bankruptcy of constructive and progressive ideology.
The Muslims and Christians in India
The impoverishment of political score
always comes in the form of patriotism. The Parivar use patriotism to dislodge
the people from their spontaneous commitment to the nation. For example
“Sarsanghchalak of the RSS, Sri K. S. Sudhershan while addressing a rally on
the eve of 75th founding day of the RSS in Nagpur
When the unreal propaganda of the
Hindutva forces literally failed to attract attention, they directly involved
in attacks on Christians, Muslims, Dalits, women etc. Their evil designs are
noticed as “these attacks are being conducted by different organizations like
BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal and many others like Hindu Jagaran Munch and Hindu
Munnani, which are floated for the specific purpose of pursuing a particular
agenda of the Hindutva politics.”[112]
The religious intolerance of the Parivar is ventilated through various
sentiments like culture, nationalism, etc.
6.9
Hindutva and Buddhism
Although Hinduism
has done all that was possible to assimilate and absorb Buddhism still the
communal forces are viciously accusing it as traitor. For them “the Buddhist sect had turned a
traitor to the mother society and the mother religion.”[113]
One thing needs to be recalled that Buddhism along with Jainism was a protest
religion in the wake of unhealthy and unprogressive religious ideas. When all
the attempts to destroy Buddhism failed now it is treated as a traitor.
Rather than accusing
other religions and their values the Hindu society needs to look
introspectively to purge the atrocities it has committed to humanity and still
aspires to continue. Thus granting religious freedom is the only way to social
development. Disallowing it will produce counterproductive results.
The Hindutva forces are willing to
deny any truth for unsuccessfully pursuing their own communal agenda. Keeping
the Christian religious minority in the picture every contributions of the
British is adversely remarked, as “let us not shut our eyes to the historical
fact that it was the scheming Britisher who, in order to perpetuate his
stranglehold on our country, planted in our minds perverted notions of
nationhood in a bid to break the proud and defiant spirit of the Hindus which
alone could have posed a real threat to his domination.”[114]
This is against the fact that the British were behind the effort to form a
unified India
Connecting Christianity with the
British again they are accused. The effort of the Englishmen is denigrated, as
“the first thing he taught was that this was one great ‘continent’ and not a
country. He said that we are not one people and one nation.”[115]
This is not the Englishmen’s version. It is history that the Aryans came to India
Even in the matters of religion it is
written against the British that “being shrewd, they knew that perpetuation of
their far-flung empire was possible only by knocking out from the minds of the
people the faith which gave them inspiration and strength to fight for
freedom.”[116] It is
untrue as the British always sided with religious neutrality and of course in
the first phase willfully supported Hinduism. In course of time the ideals of
Christianity-spiritual, social, economic, etc, attracted people and it was not
the design of the British to force Christianity. Even some of the scholarly
contributions of the British are caricatured as missionary plot.
Having analyzed the Hindutva attitude
to the religious minorities separately starting from Muslims, Christians,
Muslims and Christians together, Buddhism and British contributions it is
appropriate now to see the whole problem of freedom of religion from the point
of Religious minorities together.
6.11
Religious Minorities
Besides
other minorities in India
Unlike
the Hindutva notion of constitutional provisions and privileges to the
religious minorities, its real intentions are spelled out as “basically the
reason behind giving special rights to the minorities was to help them in
conserving and preserving their identities, and this has been repeatedly confirmed
through a number of judgments passed by the highest judicial bodies of the
country.”[118] The
Hindu communal forces often forget the fact that the constitution is dedicated
to conserve the identities of the minorities very specially religious
minorities.
In spite of all these perceptions and
provisions the religious minority in India
6.12
Rights of minority institutions
Article
29(1) protects the interests of minorities. It protects any section of citizens
that have a distinct language, culture or script, and ensures that they have
the right to preserve the same. Article 29(2) states that no citizen can be
denied admission to a State-owned or State-aided educational institution on
grounds of religion, race, caste or language.
Article 30(1) gives minorities the
right to establish and administer educational institutions. Article 30 (2)
provides that the State cannot discriminate against any educational institution
on the ground that it is under the management of a minority.
The rights mentioned under Article
twenty-nine and thirty aim to protect and preserve minority groups and their
heritage, and provide minority groups with the right to establish and
administer educational institutions without any detriment.[120]
It is beyond doubt that the Indian constitution is committed to protect the
interests of the religious minorities unlike the unhealthy determinations of
the Sang Parivar.
6.12 Rights of Minority Institutions
Although the next chapter is
completely dedicated to consider freedom of religion as a human rights issue
here a cursory understanding of it is not out of place in the context of the
entire discussions preceding and following. After the declaration of UN human
rights in 1948 again on November
25,1981 , the UN proclaimed a specific declaration on the
elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion
and belief.[121] It is
tellingly crystal clear that the whole word is against religious
discriminations of any sort. Rather the entire world is committed to allow
complete freedom in matters of choosing and following any religion.
In the Indian context this has much
relevance as India India
The international human rights
organizations are really committed to see that religious freedom is no way
obstructed to any one. Although religion is highly questioned in the globalized
context its sentiments and importance to human life is well considered. This
significance is indicated as “the right to profess and practice one’s faith was
adopted by an overwhelming vote in the UN Assembly as all the countries voted
in favour.”[123]
Another notable standpoint of the
international human rights declaration is that it has accepted minority
religious rights as core and it is a means to attain other freedoms.[124]
Invading the religious rights of the minorities is in fact invading the
minorities themselves.
N.S.
Gehlot has identified the link between human rights and fundamental rights in India December 18, 1992 , for the promotion
of safeguarding the identity for cultural, ethnic and linguistic and religious
minorities.[125] P.D.
Mathew notes the declaration as “State shall protect the existence of the
national or ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of minorities
within their respective territories and shall encourage conditions for
promotion of identity.”[126]
Along with the link between human rights and freedom of religion there is also
close connection between human rights and minority rights in India
The significance of minority rights
and its application is explained with caution, as “we must approach the problem
of minorities from the point of view that every minority is a precious element
in the totality of life of the community and every minority has to play a role
in the national life. At the same time, each minority should be careful that it
does not choose issues which are rigid.”[128]
The minority issue has gained so significant role because the majority
community generally has a tendency to subvert the interests of the minorities.
This is highlighted as “the essential purpose of the protection of minorities
is to secure for them the normal existence within the limits of the state to
which they belong.”[129]
It needs to be underlined that the minority rights are meant to guarantee
normal existence to them and not for extra privileges.
The purpose of the minority rights is
not to make the minorities completely separate from others but “the object of
giving protection was to secure for the minorities that measure of protection
and justice which would gradually prepare them to be merged in the national
community to which they belonged.”[130]
It needs to be stressed that at all levels there will be no doubts about
loyalty to nation. The loyalty will continue with the allowance of religious
freedom the minorities are entitled to. Once the identities of the minorities
except the national one are lost, they lose ground. Thus it is necessary to
preserve their identity at all levels without compromising on the sovereignty
of the nation.
Neera Chandhoke clearly expressed the
above concern as “if we are committed to a society where all human beings
realize the fullness of their being, we have to see that vulnerable groups are
not denied of their religion and culture. We have to further see that the
current phase of majoritarianism is countered systematically…”[131]
It is also crucial that all attempts to curb the minority religious rights
cannot be tolerated with as it is against the human rights and Indian constitution.
The human rights are often looked at
critically as it is more individualistic in nature.[132]
Although in India
6.13
Hindu Right Groups
Contrary to the fundamental rights and
international human rights the Hindu right groups have different opinion on the
issue of minorities particularly religious minorities. Their perception is
scripted as “the Hindu Right does not recognize the particular importance of
the right to freedom of religion for religious minorities; it does not
recognize that it is the religious beliefs and practices of these minorities
that are most vulnerable; and it does not recognize that for these religious
minorities, the right to freedom of religion is not simply a question of
individual worship, but of their collective identity and cultural survival.”[133]
Their leaders have strange arguments to support their positions. For example
L.K. Advani remarked, ‘if appeasement caused any serious damage, it was to the
minority community itself by isolating it from the mainstream’.[134]
The very expression appeasement is not in keeping with the good will of the
constitution.
No Hindu fundamental group is willing
to consider religious freedom to the minorities. Praveen Togadia (international
general secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP)) argues it was “lack of
unity among the Hindu society separated by caste barriers has weakened its
strength and has resulted in various political parties lining up behind the
minority communities for their vote bank…,”[135]
He has criticized caste for the sake of dominating the religious minorities.
A
recent study about six Hindu nationalists reveals that “they freely engaged in
manipulating the symbols of Hindu identity which often had anti-minority
connotations…All of them developed a modus operandi which involved
stigmatizing the religious minorities and secularists of India. In one form or
another they subjectively perceived Christianity and Islam as the greatest
threats to Hindu culture and their Hindu nation.”[136]
In the wake of the Hindu communalism the main target is the minority religions.
And hence freedom of religion is under threat in India
The writings of the Hindu nationalists
are also aimed at attacking the religious minorities. For example “some of
their writings are clearly meant to awaken the Leviathan in the Hindus against
the religious minorities in India
[1] P.M. Bakshi, The Constitution of India New Delhi
[2] South Asia
Human Rights Documentation Centre, Introducing Human Rights: An Overview Including Issues of Gender Justice, Environmental, and
Consumer Law ( New Delhi Oxford University
[3] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
[4] South Asia
Human Rights Documentation Centre, Introducing Human Rights: An Overview Including Issues
of Gender Justice, Environmental, and Consumer Law, 143.
[5] James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion,
Freedom of Religion and Social Engagement, edited by Howell, Richard (New Delhi
[6] R. Venkataraman, “Minority Wake-up
Call,” The Telegraph (Calcutta 11 August 2001 ,
1.
[7] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy (New
Delhi
Publishers& Distributors, 2003) 23.
[8] Ibid. , 23.
[9] Ibid. , 24.
[10] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
[11] Ibid. , 56.
[12] Ibid. , 25.
[13] Ibid. , 71.
[14] James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion,
Freedom of Religion and Social
Engagement, edited by
Howell, Richard (New Delhi
[15] Ibid.
[16] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
[17] James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion, Freedom of Religion and Social
Engagement, 123- 124.
[18] R. Venkataraman, “Minority Wake-up
Call,” The Telegraph, 1.
[19] Ibid. , 1.
[20] Ibid. ,
[21] P.M. Bakshi, The Constitution of India New Delhi
[22] Ibid. ,
[23] Pannalal Dhar , India Religion
State
(Calcutta: Punthi- Pustak, 1993), 128.
[24] Ibid. , 127.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights, 226.
[29] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy , 22-24.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Ibid. , 24.
[32] South Asia
Human Rights Documentation Centre, Introducing Human Rights: An Overview Including Issues of Gender Justice, Environmental, and
Consumer Law, 143.
[33]
James Massey, Minorities and Religious Freedom in a Democracy , 9.
[34] Ibid. , 24.
[35] Ibid.
[37] South Asia
Human Rights Documentation Centre, Introducing Human Rights: An Overview Including Issues of Gender Justice, Environmental, and
Consumer Law, 143.
[38] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy, 25.[National Minorities Development and Finance Corporation]
[39] Ibid.
[40] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights, 235.
[41] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy, 93.
[42] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
3rd ed., Reprint (Bangalore
[43] Ibid.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Ibid. , 131.
[46] Ibid.
[47] Ibid. , 154.
[48] Ibid. , 171.
[49] Ibid. , 148.
[50] Pannalal Dhar , India Religion
State
[51] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights , 190.
[52] Pannalal Dhar , India Religion
State
[53] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights, 82-83.
[54] M.A. Venkata Rao, “Introduction”, in
M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, 3rd ed., Reprint (Bangalore
[55] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
142.
[56] Ibid. , 143.
[57] Ibid. , 71.
[58] Ibid. , 178.
[59] Ibid. , 182.
[60] Ibid. , 184.
[61] Ibid. , 185.
[62] Ram Puniyani, Fascism of the Sangh
Parivar (Delhi
[63] I. Arul Aram, “Media and the Rise of
Cultural Nationalism in India
[64] Ram Puniyani, Fascism of the Sangh
Parivar, 99.
[65] Ibid. , 127.
[66] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights, 198.
[67] Ibid. ,191-92.
[68] Venkitesh Ramakrishnan, “Community on
the Margins,” Frontline (December 15, 2006 ), 4.
[69] Ibid. , 5.
[70] Ibid. , 5-7.
[71] Ibid. , 7.
[72] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
141.
[73] Ibid.
[74] Ibid. , 159.
[75] Ibid. , 189.
[76] Ibid. , 191.
[77] Ibid.
[78] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
194.
[79] SP stands for Sangh Parivar.
[80] Ram Puniyani, Fascism of the Sangh
Parivar (Delhi
[81] Ibid. , 105.
[82] Ibid. , 106.
[83] Ibid. , 107.
[84] Ibid. , 126-127.
[85] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy, 140.
[86] Ibid. , 145.
[87] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
107.
[88] Ibid. , 217.
[89]Manilal
C. Parekh, Christian Proselytism in India: A Great Menace( Rajkot
[91] James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion, Freedom of Religion and Social
Engagement, 126.
[92] Ibid.
[93] James Massey, “Why the Fundamental
Rights of Dalit Christians should be restored?,” NCC Review cxxv/3
(April, 2005): 10.
[94] Ibid. , 13.
[95] A. Philomin Raj, “Church and the
Issue of Dalit Christians,” NCC Review cxxv/3
(April, 2005): 42.
[96] Ibid. , 42-43.
[97] Ibid. , 43.
[98] Ibid. , 46-47.
[99]D.K. Sahu, “An Open Letter to the
Ecumenical Colleagues,” NCC Review cxxv/3
(April, 2005): 56-57.
[100] James Massey, “Why the Fundamental
Rights of Dalit Christians should be restored?,” NCC Review, 13.
[101] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
117.
[102] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
3rd ed., Reprint (Bangalore
2000), 125.
[103] Ibid. , 125.
[104] Ibid.
[105] Ibid. , 126.
[106] Ibid.
[107] Ibid. , 127.
[108] Ibid. , 128.
[109] Ibid. , 158.
[110] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Hindutva:
Who is a Hindu?, 6th ed. (New
Delhi
[111] Shamsul Islam, Know the RSS ( Delhi
[112] Ram Puniyani, Fascism of the Sangh
Parivar, 9.
[113] M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts,
70.
[114] Ibid. , 156.
[115] Ibid. , 134.
[116] Ibid. , 134.
[117] James Massey, Minorities and
Religious Freedom in a Democracy (New
Delhi
[118] Ibid. , 129.
[119] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights, 63.
[120] South Asia
Human Rights Documentation Centre, Introducing Human Rights: An Overview Including Issues of Gender Justice, Environmental, and
Consumer Law, 79-80.
[121] N.S. Gehlot, “The Human Rights
Movement in India
Perspectives on Human Rights, edited by M. B. Dube and Neeta Bora
(New Delhi
[122] I. John Mohan Razu and D. Samuel
Jesupatham, “Religious Rights as Part of Human Rights when the Lives of the Minorities are
at Stake,” in Struggle for Human Rights: Towards a New Humanity, edited
by I. John Mohan Razu ( Nagpur India
[123] Ibid.
[124] Ibid.
[125] N.S. Gehlot, “The Human Rights
Movement in India
Perspectives
on Human Rights, 63.
[126] P.D. Mathew, “Human Rights of
Minorities,” Indian Currents XI/1(January 4-10, 1999): 40.
[127] James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion, Freedom of Religion and Social
Engagement, 118.
[128] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
Rights , 230.
[129] Sunita Gangwal, Minorities in India
[130] Ibid. , 231.
[131] Neera Chandhoke, Beyond
Secularism, the rights of Religious Minorities (New Delhi
[132]James Massey, “Human Rights and
Minorities,” in Free to Choose: Issues in Conversion, Freedom of Religion and Social
Engagement, 117.
[133] Brenda Cossman and Ratna Kapur, Secularism’s
Last Sigh: Hindutva and the (Mis) Rule of Law (New Delhi: Oxford University Press,
1999) 108.
[134] “Minorities Appeasement a Crime
against Society,” The Hindu (Vijayawada
March 2006, 12.
[135] “Lack of Unity among Hindus to Blame:
Togadia,” The Hindu (Vijayawada
March 2006, 6.
[136] J. Kuruvachira, Hindu Nationalists
of Modern India
Genealogy of Hindutva. (Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 2006),
228.
[137] Ibid. , 230.
[138] Ibid. , 231.
Comments
Post a Comment