State-supported religious reform

Topic: Secularism: Western and Indian Models · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 8 "Secularism"

Meaning

State-supported religious reform is a feature of Indian secularism: the state may use law to end unfair or oppressive practices inside a religion, even when those practices claim a religious basis. Examples are the ban on untouchability and laws against child marriage.

It matters because it is one of the three ways, as listed by NCERT (Class 11), in which Indian secularism differs from the Western model. In India, religious freedom is never absolute. The state can step in to protect equality and dignity.

Explanation

How it works

• In the Western model, there is a strict wall of separation. The state stays out of religion, and religion stays out of the state. Religion is a purely private matter.
• In the Indian model, religion is not only a private matter. The state may deal with religion openly when that protects freedom and equality.
• The basic idea:
• Some practices hurt people inside a religion, for example dalits or women.
• Leaving religion alone would leave those people without help.
• So the state passes laws to end these practices.

Part of a wider fight against domination

• Indian secularism is equally concerned with two kinds of domination:
• Intra-religious domination: one group oppresses another group within the same religion. Examples are the oppression of dalits and women within Hinduism, and discrimination against women within Indian Islam and Christianity.

• Inter-religious domination: one religious community oppresses another. An example is a majority threatening minority rights.

• State-supported reform is the main tool against intra-religious domination.

How a reforming state stays secular: principled distance

• Principled distance is a term coined by political theorist Rajeev Bhargava (1998). It means the state keeps a distance from all religions, but it may step in or stay out depending on what best serves freedom, equality and peace.
• Two kinds of engagement:
• Negative engagement means opposing religious tyranny. Abolishing untouchability (Art. 17) is an example. State-supported reform belongs here.

• Positive engagement means giving help, such as state aid to minority schools (Art. 30(2)).

• "Principled": the state acts on constitutional values, not for vote-bank or other opportunistic reasons.

• "Distance" is not equidistance: a practice that oppresses people in one religion may need state action, while another religion may need none.
• India is still secular while it reforms religion:
• It is not theocratic. A theocracy is a state ruled by religious leaders or religious law.
• It has no state religion.

Limits and conditions

• Reform must be done by law and must serve social welfare and reform (Art. 25(2)(b)) [2].
• Religious freedom under Art. 25(1) is itself subject to public order, morality and health and to the other Fundamental Rights [2].
• Why "equal respect for all religions" does not fit:
• Reform means the state must disrespect some practices, such as caste hierarchy or untouchability.
• The state may even show "equal disrespect" by criticising unfair practices in every religion alike.

In the Constitution and practice

• Art. 25(2)(b): Art. 25 does not stop the state from making laws "providing for social welfare and reform" or for "the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus" [2].
• Art. 25(2)(a): the state can regulate the secular activities linked to religious practice. State Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Acts run temple boards under this power [3].
• Key reforms:

Reform	Legal anchor	What it ended
Ban on untouchability	Art. 17	Caste-based exclusion. Practising it is now punishable
Laws against child marriage	Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929, now the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006	Marriage of minors
Inter-caste marriage made acceptable in law	Special Marriage Act 1954 (civil marriage across caste or religion); Hindu Marriage Act 1955	Caste limits on marriage
Temple entry for all Hindus	Art. 25(2)(b)	Keeping dalits out of public temples

• Hindu Code laws (1955–56): Parliament reformed Hindu personal law, for example through the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
• M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India (1994): the Supreme Court held that a secular state can still remove practices "derived from or connected with religion" when they block development and the right to equality [3].
• NCERT exercise: state action to ensure dalit temple entry is fully compatible with secularism under Art. 17 and Art. 25(2)(b) [2]. Government-appointed temple boards are contested, because some groups demand to "free temples" from state control [3].

Don't confuse with

• Wall of separation (Western model): the state never interferes in religion. Indian secularism allows the state to step in to reform religion.
• Equal respect for all religions (sarva dharma sambhava): this slogan suggests respecting every practice. Reform means the state can disrespect unfair practices, such as untouchability. That is why the 1978 attempt to define 'secular' as "equal respect for all religions" was never written into the Constitution [3].
• Positive engagement: this means helping religions, for example aid to minority schools under Art. 30(2). Reform is negative engagement, which means opposing religious oppression.
• Art. 25(2)(a) vs Art. 25(2)(b): (a) lets the state regulate the secular activities (economic, financial or political) linked to religion, such as temple administration. (b) is about social welfare and reform and temple entry [2].

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 25(2)(b) allows laws for social welfare and reform and for the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus. It does not grant freedom of conscience; that is Art. 25(1) [2].
• Art. 17 abolishes untouchability and makes its practice punishable. It is the textbook example of state-supported reform and negative engagement.
• Child Marriage Restraint Act (1929) was replaced by the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
• Special Marriage Act, 1954 allows civil marriage across caste or religion. The Hindu Marriage Act dates from 1955.
• M. Ismail Faruqui (1994): a secular state can remove religion-linked practices that block development and equality [3].
• Trap: "principled distance" was coined by Rajeev Bhargava, not Nehru or Ambedkar.

Mains Points

• Reform vs the wall of separation:
• India's model lets the state reform religion through Art. 17, Art. 25(2)(b) and the 1955–56 Hindu Code laws.
• Critics say reform has fallen unevenly on Hindus, while minority personal laws are largely untouched. This links to the debate on Art. 44 (Uniform Civil Code, a single set of personal laws for all citizens) [3].

• Defenders reply that principled distance need not mean equidistance.

• Equal respect vs equal disrespect:

• The state's duty is to equality and dignity, not to respecting every practice.

• Useful case studies are temple-entry disputes, triple talaq, and the demand to free temples from HR&CE boards [3].

• Where reform should stop:

• Reform must be "principled", which means guided by constitutional values, not by vote-bank politics.
• Art. 25(1) limits (public order, morality, health) and Art. 25(2) powers give the boundaries [2].
• Art. 26 still protects each denomination's right to manage its own religious affairs [3].

Related concepts

• Indian model of secularism
• Principled distance
• Equal respect for all religions

Read more

• The Indian model: principled distance and state-supported reform