– Prof. Bal Ram Singh
As we celebrate the 74th Republic Day (Ganatantra Divas) of India, it may be just about the time to reflect upon its origin, inspiration, and adoption of the Indian constitution by the Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949, and went into effect on January 26, 1950.
Indian constitution, perhaps the largest of any constitution in the world, in large part borrowed from other countries, that too mostly from the Western nations. Looking at an online website of an educational service for candidates appearing in the Indian Administrative service exam one can see the sources of the Indian constitution, from Preamble to administrative details, mostly being from outside, including the 1935 Government of India Act enacted by the British.
Much of the Indian laws are still from the British colonial days, despite the fact that the Indian Constituent assembly consisting of 293 members, including 15 women, (commenced on December 6, 1947) met for about two years to draft and adopt the Indian constitution (November 26, 1949). It had members from the Congress Party which had a majority, Muslim League, Scheduled Caste Federation, the Indian Communist Party, and the Union Party. There is much to discuss about various aspects of the Indian constitution, but just focusing on the Preamble of the constitution that has garnered continuous debate on its value, especially regarding its amendment to include the two words – Socialist Secular, as in the following:
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION
As shown in the Table, it is believed the Preamble is borrowed from the US and French constitution. However, tenors of the preambles of those constitutions are more empowered and emphatic than that of the Indian constitution.
For example, although Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity (kind of) is supposed to be derived from the French constitution, French themselves did not place it within their Preamble. “The preamble of the constitution recalls the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen from 1789 and establishes France as a secular and democratic country, deriving its sovereignty from the people.” In fact, French have struggled with this concept within their history, and had a slightly different twist to it. “It (the symbol of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity; in fact, “Unity, indivisibility of the Republic: liberty, equality or death”) returned during the Revolution in 1848, which defined it as a principle of the Republic, enshrined in its constitution. The Church then accepted this triad as a summary of Christian values: priests celebrate fraternity with Christ and bless Liberty Trees.” It just goes a long way to show that a Secular constitution finds acceptability of liberty and fraternity, because it is in accordance with the Christian values. But more important element is the equality, which is so important that either equality (egalite) or death (mort). It is akin to something like Pran Jayn Par Vachan Na Jayi (preferring death to one not being able to keep one’s word).
Most likely, some of these concepts also were derived from the intellectual borrowing from the academic world of the Western scholars with whom stalwarts like Dr. BR Ambedkar had interacted. Ambedkar’s thought was deeply etched by the ideas of John Dewey of the Columbia University, professor he was very influenced with, for education as linked to experience, as practical and contextual, and the ideas of freedom and equality as essentially tied with the ideals of justice and of fraternity, a concept he would go on to apply to the Indian context, and to his pointed criticism of the caste system.
The preamble of the US Constitution (which is among the shortest in the world) on the other hand emphasizes perfection through justice, tranquility, defense, welfare, and liberty, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.“
These reflect the struggles these countries had for their values in their history, and thus gel with their tenor. India, on the other hand, retained its slavery to the colonial powers even in framing their constitution. Nothing about the Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam to encompass its diversity, nothing about the Satyameva Jayate that adores its national emblem, and nothing about Ekam Satya Viprah Bahudha Vadanti that was even quoted by the UN General Secretary, Koffi Annan, in his Nobel Peace Prize speech in 2001. Even more pathetic situation has been the lack of any discussion and debate even as the country is touted as the largest democracy, largest constitution, the most ancient civilization, and potential revival of the Vishwa Guru status!
Still, there has been a substantial debate on Indian constitution related to the substantial amount of remnant British laws still in the books, but none more than that is related to the introduction of the terms socialist secular as part of the 42nd amendment in December 1976. Part of the controversy is due to the fact that it was passed during the emergency period imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. But the substantial part of the opposition is for the addition of word ‘Secular’ in the preamble. While politicians generally act only when it has some electoral advantages, there is no evidence of any electoral advantage Mrs. Gandhi could reap by introducing the ‘Secular’ word in the preamble. It could be an intellectual or philosophical awakening, international pressure, or diversion strategy that forced Mrs. Gandhi to introduce such a step that actually had no measurable meaning, especially in view of the Article 51A that exhorted citizens to develop a scientific temper. A scientific temper means any and every belief can be questions with all due respects.
For the inclusion of secular in the preamble, MS Yazdani in piece in The Daily Guardian opines (October, 13, 2021) that, “The addition of the term ‘Secular’ to the preamble of the constitution established secularism as a part of the basic structure which essentially means that because of its fundamental element, the secular nature of the Indian constitution cannot be altered by any act.” That tactic makes sense, but unfortunately, Indian intellectuals are such a servile class that they are a ready master’s voices to justify any even good idea without grasping and clasping, but certainly with rasping.
The case of S. R. Bommai vs. Union of India is cited as a landmark case when it comes to establishing the basic definition of secularism in India. There, the Supreme Court stated, “The term ‘Secular’ has advisedly not been defined presumably because it is a very elastic term not capable of a precise definition and perhaps best left undefined. By this amendment what was implicit was made explicit.” Well.. well.. well.. My Lord may, in fact, a take a lesson or two in English origin of the word ‘Secular’. A problem with Indian intelligentsia and ruling structure is that they blindly follow, not translate, the English words, by going into their origin to separate the chaff from the grain, so to speak. A fairly simple look at the etymology of ‘Secular’ makes it abundantly clear. The ‘Secular’ word comes from Latin saeculum or Saecularis, both referring to relating to age, time, or generation. Its original meaning has almost nothing to do with religion, except it was applied to describe the rigid and old ways of Christianity.
In fact, ‘Secular’ word has been used regularly in other fields of studies, such as biology, sociology, geology, life sciences, etc. For example, an author of a work in medical anthropology explains the meaning of ‘Secular’ for the discipline of biology:
“A secular trend is a gradual, unidirectional change in a characteristic over time. The word “secular” is related to the Latin word for “century” (saeculum); therefore, a secular trend is one that takes place over one hundred years or over two or three generations. For example, ages at menarche have become earlier over time (Eveleth and Tanner) and height has increased over time (Bogin). (Shook, J., 2020. The Meaning of ‘Secular’ as a Scientific Concept. Secularism and Nonreligion, 9, p.1).
Therefore, Secular basically means that everything, including scientific approach political system, social structure, educational formats, etc. need to updated regularly, and one should apply the same to the religions, rather than making them sanctimonious!
Prof. Bal Ram Singh, School of Indic Studies and Botulinum Research Center, Institute of Advanced Sciences, Dartmouth, USA
Vedic WAVES 